Senate Hearing, 107TH Congress - America's Global Dialog: Sharing American Values and The Way Ahead For Public Diplomacy

S. HRG.
107692
AMERICAS GLOBAL DIALOG: SHARING AMERICAN

VALUES AND THE WAY AHEAD FOR PUBLIC
DIPLOMACY
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
JUNE 11, 2002
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

81880 PDF WASHINGTON : 2002
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 5121800; DC area (202) 5121800
Fax: (202) 5122250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 204020001
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:31 Oct 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 81880 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware, Chairman
PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland JESSE HELMS, North Carolina
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska
RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota BILL FRIST, Tennessee
BARBARA BOXER, California LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island
ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia
BILL NELSON, Florida SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Staff Director

PATRICIA A. MCNERNEY, Republican Staff Director
(II)
CONTENTS
Page
Beers, Hon. Charlotte, Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and
Public Affairs, Department of State, Washington, DC ..................................... 7
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 11
Responses to additional questions for the record ........................................... 61
Biden, Hon. Joseph R., Jr., U.S. Senator from Delaware, prepared statement . 4
Feingold, Hon. Russell D., U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, prepared statement .. 64
Gingrich, Hon. Newt, former Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives; senior
fellow, American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC .................................. 33
Ginsberg, Hon. Marc, former Ambassador to Morocco; CEO and managing
director, Northstar Equity Group, Washington, DC ......................................... 39
Hoffman, David, president, Internews, Arcata, CA .............................................. 45
Keith, Amb. Kenton W., chair, Alliance for International Education and Cul-
tural Exchange and senior vice president, Meridian International Center,
statement submitted for the record .................................................................... 73
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, prepared state-
ment and a series of letters in support of the Cultural Bridges Act of
2002 ....................................................................................................................... 65
Pattiz, Hon. Norman J., Governor, Broadcasting Board of Governors, Wash-
ington, DC ............................................................................................................. 13
Surroi, Veton, chairman, KOHA Media Group, Pristina, Kosovo ........................ 50
(III)
AMERICAS GLOBAL DIALOG: SHARING AMER-
ICAN VALUES AND THE WAY AHEAD FOR
PUBLIC DIPLOMACY
TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 2002
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE
FOREIGN RELATIONS,
ON
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:55 a.m., in room
SD419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
(chairman of the committee), presiding.
Present: Senators Biden, Dodd, Boxer, Bill Nelson, Lugar, Hagel,
Chafee and Brownback.
The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. As I just ex-
plained to our first panel and I will say to the audience, we apolo-
gize for getting started late. The Foreign Relations Committee had
a private meeting with Prime Minister Sharon and it ran a little
late, but in fact what we are about to speak to today quite frankly
will have some serious impact on how well we do on many various
issues we discussed with Prime Minister Sharon today.
As we consider public diplomacy in the 21st century, we are very
mindful that our voice competes amidst the cacophony of voices
shaping global opinion in a way that has never occurred before.
Today, with the Internet, satellite, radio and TV networks pro-
viding instantaneous and often unfiltered and selectively unfiltered
information, public diplomacy is more important and more difficult
than it has ever been before, in my view. No matter how powerful
our military, we will not be able to achieve all of our foreign policy
objectives if we lose the war of ideas. In public diplomacy we must
use our most powerful tool, truth. Truth, credibility and openness.
As the legendary journalist and former USIA Director Edward R.
Murrow said, and I quote, truth is the best propaganda, and lies
the worst. I cannot emphasize that enough. What we are about
here today, what we have been about, and what the Secretary has
been about, is not about trying to shape an incorrect image of our
views or ideas and our people, but the truth, openness, and credi-
bility which will flow from the former truth and openness.
We are going to have to reach out to people in their own lan-
guage and in their own terms, and we must foster the free flow of
ideas, even if it is sometimes critical for the United States of Amer-
ica. We do not expect anyone to like us, or everyone to like us, I
should say, but there is no good reason for us to be so misrepre-
sented and misunderstood. We are one of the most advanced cen-
ters of communication in the world. We should be more successful
(1)
2
when we reach out. We should be better able to get the facts out,
and if we do a better job, those who question our motives and rein-
terpret the facts will have a much tougher time getting traction in
public opinion in other parts of the world. Today, I hope to explore
what we can do to explain ourselves better and promote under-
standing, and I hope we will learn what more we can do, and how
we should organize to do it.
All we want is a real chance for the facts to come before the peo-
ple of the world, particularly, I would say at this moment, the Mus-
lim world, 1.2 billion people, and let them make up their own mind.
I am not asking to be loved. I am not asking to be embraced. I am
just asking that we have a fair chance to be understood.
There are countless examples of where we do this well. I know
the State Departments Web site, for example, offers content in
Chinese, Arabic, Spanish, French, Russian, in addition to English.
It gets more than 4 million hits a month, I am told. After 9/11, the
United States and our allies set up coalition information centers in
London, Islamabad, and Washington to coordinate messages, com-
bat misinformation, and to stay ahead of the 24-hour global news
cycle.
USAID worked with NGOs like Open Society Institute to support
the development of independent media organizations in the former
Yugoslavia in the Milosevic regime, which I am now happy to say
he is in jail and being tried. The now-famous Radio B2 in Bel-
grade played a critical role in forming the opposition to and the
eventual ouster of and arrest of Milosevic. The U.S. Governments
assistance to the American NGOs search for common ground
helped create multi-ethnic versions of Sesame Street that has pro-
moted tolerance between the children of Macedonia and Cyprus.
Despite these successful programs and others I could mention,
the hard work of people like Under Secretary Beers and her prede-
cessor, Evelyn Lieberman, Americas public diplomacy still falls
short of where it needs to be. Four years ago, this committee led
the way in devising a merger of the former U.S. Information Agen-
cy into the Department of State. The goal of this reorganization
was to integrate the policymakers and public diplomacy specialists.
The merger of two different cultures has taken time, and is not yet
complete.
Public diplomacy considerations are still not, in my view, fully in-
corporated into the public formulation process. There is still not
adequate interagency coordination, although it is much better, and
we still do not have a national information strategy providing the
long-term vision of where the American public diplomacy needs to
be, and we are still doing public diplomacy on the cheap, with fund-
ing cuts half what it was in 1994 and today. As I always say, if
you want to know what we value, follow the money. Take a look
at the budget.
Todays hearing will look at what the State Department and
other agencies are doing and should be doing to promote our public
diplomacy agenda. We consider developments in U.S. international
broadcasting, particularly the Middle East Radio Network, the
brainchild of one of our witnesses today, and the Broadcasting
Board of Governors. It is an FM and AM digital satellite network
that spans the Arabic-speaking world, targeting young audiences
3
with innovative programming. Early indications are that it is going

swimmingly well and impressively gaining adherence and cus-
tomers who want to listen.
We have two people before us, by the way, who in their private
lives have demonstrated they know how to get people to listen.
They know how to make it work, and Norm Pattiz has made a
moderately good living at knowing how to do that.
Should this radio model be replicated elsewhere, is one of the
questions we want to talk about today. Should we establish a com-
panion U.S. satellite television network?
We will also examine what the United States can do to encour-
age the development of indigenous independent media where it
does not exist today. As we have learned, for better or worse, peo-
ple tend to trust local sources of news and information more than
they do foreign sources. Without a free, fair, and open flow of infor-
mation in these societies, propaganda and misinformation are able
to flourish. It is in our interests to have professional journalism
abroad promoting the internal dialog that serves their interests as
well. Public diplomacy is not just about what we say. It is about
promoting an environment in which multiple voices, including our
own, can be heard.
We will hear today from two panels of witnesses to advise us on
these issues. Our first panel includes Under Secretary of State for
Public Diplomacy, Charlotte Beers, and in full disclosure my per-
sonal friend Norm Pattiz, representing the Broadcasting Board of
Governors. Under Secretary Beers has served as CEO for two of
the worlds largest advertising agencies, J. Walter Thompson, and
Ogilvy and Mather. Norm Pattiz is the founder and chairman of
Westwood One, Americas largest radio network company, and
some other interests as well.
Our second panel includes Ambassador Marc Ginsberg, a former
Ambassador to Morocco and now CEO and managing director of
Northstar Equity Group. We will be joined by a man who, to use
the old cliche, needs no introduction in this town, the former
Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, and we are happy to have
the Speaker here. Speaker Gingrich is now the CEO of Gingrich
Group, an Atlanta-based communications and management con-
sulting firm, and serves as senior fellow of the American Enter-
prise Institute, and I would like him disseminating information
abroad and not in Delaware for a long time. I wish him well. I
would like to have him go full-time on dealing with other countries.
But welcome, Mr. Speaker. We love you in Delaware, but they
love you too much in Delaware.
David Hoffman, the president of Internews Network, a global
nonprofit organization that supports open media worldwide, will be
our next witness, and he will be followed by a man for whom I
have great respect and I have met numerous times during our ef-
forts in the Balkans, Veton Surroi, chairman of KOHA Media
Group in Kosovo and a leading advocate for democracy and inde-
pendent media in Kosovo, and a man who I could go on for a long
time to talk about. Had we listened to his advice, in my view, in
1994, we would have made progress even faster in the region.
4
I would also now like to invite Senator Lugar to make any open-
ing comments he has, and then we will proceed with the witnesses.
Again, I say welcome to all the witnesses.
[The prepared statement of Senator Biden follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR.
As we consider public diplomacy in the 21st century, we are mindful that our
voice competes amidst the cacophony of voices shaping global opinion.
Today, with the Internet, satellite radio and TV networks providing instantaneous
and often unfiltered information, public diplomacy is more important and more dif-
ficult than ever before.
No matter how powerful our military, we will not be able to achieve all our for-
eign policy objectives if we lose the war of ideas.
In public diplomacy, we must use our most powerful tools: Truth, credibility, and
openness. We must reach out to people in their own language and in their own
terms. And we must foster the free flow of ideas, even if its critical of the United
States.
We dont expect everyone to like us, but theres no good reason for us to be so
misrepresented and misunderstood.
Were one of the most advanced centers of communications in the world. We
should be more successful when we reach out. We should be better able to get the
facts out. If we do a better job, those who question our motives or misrepresent the
facts will have a much tougher time getting traction with public opinion.
Today I hope we will explore what we can do to explain ourselves better and pro-
mote understanding. And I hope well learn what more we can do, and how we
should organize to do it.
All we want is a real chance for the facts to come before the people of the world.
And let them make up their minds.
There are countless examples of where we do this well. I know the State Depart-
ments Web site offers content in Chinese, Arabic, Spanish, French and Russian in
addition to English. It gets more than four million hits a month.
After 9-11, the United States and our allies set up Coalition Information Centers
in London, Islamabad, and Washington to coordinate messages, combat misinforma-
tion, and stay ahead of the 24 hour global news cycle.
USAID worked with NGOs like the Open Society Institute to support the develop-
ment of independent media organizations in the former Yugoslavia under the
Milosevic regime. The now famous Radio B-92 in Belgrade played a critical role in
fomenting the opposition to, and the eventual ouster of, Milosevic.
With U.S. government assistance, the American NGO Search for Common Ground
helped create multi-ethnic versions of Sesame Street that have promoted tolerance
among children in Macedonia and Cyprus.
Despite these successful programs and the hard work of people like Under Sec-
retary Beers, and her predecessor Evelyn Lieberman, American public diplomacy
falls far short of where it needs to be.
Four years ago, this committee led the way in devising the merger of the former
U.S. Information Agency into the Department of State. The goal of this reorganiza-
tion was to integrate the policy makers and public diplomacy specialists. The merger
of two different cultures has taken time, and is not complete.
Public diplomacy considerations are still not fully incorporated into the policy for-
mulation process. There is still no adequate interagency coordination.
We still dont have a national information strategy providing a long-term vision
of where American public diplomacy needs to be. And, were still doing public diplo-
macy on the cheap, with funding cut in half between 1994 and today. As I always
say, follow the money.
Todays hearing will look at what the State Department and other agencies ARE
doing and SHOULD be doing to promote our public diplomacy agenda.
Well consider developments in U.S. international broadcasting, particularly the
Middle East Radio Network, the brainchild of Norm Pattiz and the Broadcasting
Board of Governors. Its an FM, AM, and digital satellite network that spans the
Arabic-speaking world targeting a young audience with innovative programming.
Early indications are that its going swimmingly, and gaining an impressively large
audience in the region.Should this radio model be replicated elsewhere? Should we
establish a companion U.S. satellite television network?
Well also examine what the United States can do to encourage the development
of indigenous, independent media where it does not exist today.
5
As weve learned, for better or worse, people tend to trust local sources of news
and information more than foreign sources.
Without a free, fair, and open flow of information within these societies, propa-
ganda and misinformation flourish.
Its in our interest to have professional journalism abroad promoting a healthy in-
ternal dialogue that serves their interest.
Public diplomacy is not just about what we say, its about promoting an environ-
ment in which multiple voices, including our own, can be heard.
We will hear today from two panels of witnesses to advise us on these issues. Our
first panel includes Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Charlotte Beers
and my friend Norm Pattiz, representing the Broadcasting Board of Governors.
Under Secretary Beers has served as the CEO of two of the worlds largest adver-
tising agenciesJ. Walter Thompson and Ogilvy and Mather. Norm Pattiz is the
founder and chairman of Westwood One, Americas largest radio network company.
Our second panel will include Ambassador Marc Ginsberg, the former U.S. Am-
bassador to Morocco and now the CEO and managing director of the Northstar Eq-
uity Group.
He will be joined by a man who, to use the old cliche, needs no introduction in
this town, the former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. Speaker Gingrich is
now the CEO of the Gingrich Group, an Atlanta-based communications and manage-
ment consulting firm, and serves as a senior fellow at the American Enterprise In-
stitute.
David Hoffman, the president of Internews Network, a global non-profit organiza-
tion that supports open media worldwide will be our next witness. He will be fol-
lowed by Veton Surroi, chairman of the KOHA Media Group in Kosovo, and a lead-
ing advocate for democracy and independent media in Kosovo.
Senator BOXER. Mr. Chairman, could I ask if it would be possible

to have 60 seconds to speak, because of our delay. I have an 11:30
appointment. I just want to make one point, if I could just speak
for a minute.
The CHAIRMAN. After Senator Lugar.
Senator BOXER. Of course.
Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appre-
ciate your calling the hearing, and your very strong and com-
prehensive statement, which really covers the territory so well. As
all of us will observe, the war on terrorism has brought the impor-
tance and the value of effective public diplomacy to the fore. I am
not the only American who is dismayed at the level of disenchant-
ment and in some cases outright hatred voiced by many in the
world toward the United States.
Recently, there has been much discussion of the so-called Arab
Street, strong opposition to American policies toward terrorism and
the Middle East peace process. However, it would appear this is
simply the tip of the iceberg. Clearly, many in the Middle East op-
pose American policies, but we now read the people of the Phil-
ippines on occasion are distrustful of American counterterrorism
trainers and advisors sent there to assist in tracking the Abu
Sayyef terrorist group.
In Indonesia, opposition from the local population continues to
confound attempts to improve security cooperation. Elsewhere, Eu-
ropeans believe the United States is retreating from the inter-
national scene and entering an isolationist cocoon. No matter
where we turn, the people of the world are either not well-informed
about American policies and intentions, or recede to the anti-Amer-
ican messages that are more powerful or effective than our own.
These revelations must serve as a wake-up call to our govern-
ment. Our policies may be well-intentioned, but still find little re-
ceptivity with local populations. The United States must radically
6
improve its public diplomacy efforts. We must explain and broad-

cast American views and values much more effectively. Responsi-
bility rests with both the executive and legislative branches of gov-
ernment. We have permitted these critical foreign policy tools to
languish and to decay, and as a government we must take more
time, pay more attention, and apply more resources to fostering our
public diplomacy.
The first step must be a revitalization of the organization, the
people, the tools, and the content of our public diplomacy. Obvi-
ously, there is no single answer to the challenge we face. It is more
likely that the problems are systemic. We must question and ana-
lyze the basic tenets that form the foundation of our policies in this
area. Our goal must be not simply to identify and implement short-
term fixes, but to address the root causes of the inadequacies and
shortcomings in our policies and our outreach programs.
A number of different proposals have been put forward to ad-
dress the public diplomacy challenges at the State Department.
One of the most interesting suggestions calls for reorganizing the
public diplomacy apparatus by placing resources, budgets, per-
sonnel, and staff under the direct control of Under Secretary Beers.
I would be interested in hearing her views on this, as well as her
thoughts on funding public diplomacy. I am hopeful that Ms. Beers
and other witnesses will provide the committee with useful rec-
ommendations with which to engage the administration in formu-
lating an effective strategy.
Mr. Chairman, I recommend we use todays hearing as the basis
for the construction of a bill, of legislation to revitalize American
public diplomacy. I know many members of this committee have
been giving a lot of thought to this issue, and I propose it is time
to get to work.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. I could not agree with you more, Senator.
Senator Boxer.
Senator BOXER. Thank you so much for your courtesy. I wanted
to thank Charlotte Beers for keeping me so well-informed on her
efforts, because you promised to do that in a hearing, and you are
sending me things like this, and it matters to me and I thank you.
I also wanted to welcome one of my star constituents who I am
forced to share with the rest of the country, Norm Pattiz, and to
say that his vision for this Middle East Radio was right on target.
One of your colleagues on the Board of Governors said the fol-
lowing, broadcasting services such as Middle East Radio Network
are the best high-yield, low-cost weapon in our arsenal. They are
the most cost-effective way of reaching the outside world.
This is something that our chairman and ranking member I
know believe, and in closing I just wanted to read a couple of e-
mails that went to your station from the people who we are trying
to impact. One says, Hi, I am from Abu Dhabi, UAE. Actually I
listen to your channel every day because I am crazy about music,
both Arabic and English, and I really appreciate your efforts to
make us happy all day.
And another says, hello people, I am a Palestinian who lives be-
tween Amman and Kuwait. I can here Sawa in Amman and in Ku-
wait as well. All I want to say is, I am so proud of you guys, and
7
very happy to hear this station. You can hear it everywhere, espe-
cially in Amman in the shopping malls and in the coffee shops. All
the guys and girls, mothers and fathers, are very amused by
Sawa. Keep up the good work, guys.
And then here is what I wanted to make sure you heard. P.S.,
I have a question. What is the nationality of this station, and who
is the owner, and I think what that says is, the way you are put-
ting forward the information makes sense.
Another says, your music is good, the news is not biased. I think
it is not biased, and then I love this, I want to ask you to play
me two songs, Dont Let Me Get Me, by Pink, and an Arabic song
called Gogali, and it is by Guitara, and I hope you play both.
Anyway, I think that this shows, Mr. Chairman, that the won-
derful results we are having, and not that it is a panacea, but in
a very tough world and a tough challenge, it is something we must
do, and I commend both of you. Thank you, and I commend my
chairman and the ranking member for caring about this and letting
me speak. Thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. We are very commendable.
Madam Secretary, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLOTTE BEERS, UNDER SECRETARY
OF STATE FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS,
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. BEERS. Chairman Biden, distinguished members
The CHAIRMAN. I hate to ask you to do this. What is going to
happen is, these microphonesas the Senator from South Carolina
says, these machines are quite old. We are going to one day mod-
ernize the Senatebut you have to hold it very close to your
mouth, I apologize, so people in the back can hear you. I am sorry.
Ms. BEERS. Well then, I had better start with my illustrious ad-
dress again. Chairman Biden and distinguished members of the
committee, it is a great honor to be in this room. This is exactly
where I was sworn in on October 11, and it does not exactly seem
like a few days ago, but the time has sped by. I put in my state-
ment for the record a good report on how I think we have done in
the current response and the immediacy that was required of us all
to answer the war on terrorism. What I want to do in the short
time that I have with you here is, in fact, take you to longer-term
priorities that I hope we can all address.
As President Bush says, this will be a long war. I believe we
have to enter the turbulent and faster-moving information revolu-
tion aggressively to build a larger presence, and I would call it,
from my background in the advertising and marketing world, a
larger share of voice. We have to continue to strengthen and defend
that business which we do well, which is our ability to speak with
government officials and elites, but at the same time we really
must enlarge our communication with the mainstream of young
adults, significantly in the Middle East and South and Southeast
Asia, and even those young adults outside of cities. We have to
meet this expanded audience as, in fact, you said, Chairman Biden,
on their own terms and in their own channels of distribution.
So what about those who are even younger and under 20? I think
we must develop plans, resources, and teams to seek the help of
8
the huge multinational companies and also the foreign students

from U.S. universities to activate them to talk about our common
values and to demonstrate the democratization in some form and
answer the final questions, what is in it for me, where can I go,
where can I get a job?
We had a number of discussions with these kinds of constitu-
encies, and the willingness is there. These commitments will re-
quire a change in skill structure and allocation of resources in pub-
lic diplomacy. We have to go beyond polling, as it is called here,
to include diagnostic research that evaluates not just what they
think, but why, so that we can use this research to lead us to im-
proved programs. We have already hired an outside consultant,
and it is changing a lot about the way we ask these questions, and
we are just fielding a major study with a more sophisticated view
of what we are going to do with the data.
We also want to significantly expand our training and public di-
plomacy officers, not only in depth and scope of training, which
frankly has been thin, but to also include the most modern mar-
keting and communication skills, because we are going to ask these
officers to operate in a very different kind of universe.
Both Secretary Powell and I are addressing the public diplomacy
structure in this our third year of consolidation. Our inquiry will
examine how we can maximize communication to more people, en-
courage innovation, and also accountability within the public diplo-
macy family as well as the status at the table of policy develop-
ment.
So where do we get the programs for this better-trained and big-
ger public diplomacy team who is now going to be asked to expand
their reach to even larger audiences? Well, I want you to know that
we have one program that provides nothing less than a complete
transformation. Let me illustrate. We just had a brave woman, a
Saudi novelist and journalist, who dared the rejection and anxiety
that surrounded her when she said she was coming to the United
States on an exchange visit. Listen to what she said when she re-
turned to Saudi Arabia:
Everyone says Westerners are bad and mean, but it is not true.
People here are telling a bunch of lies about the West. You know,
the people I met are nice. They are friendly, they smile. Nobody
stares at you or follows you around. They do not waste money.
They do not leave food around. They respect limits. Their customs
are nice.
In America, men and women cooperate together to make their
lives better. They help each other. They are organized, and they
can plan for their future. They like to have real dialogs on many
subjects. The women are strong. Older people are active and en-
gaged. In this house in which I lived there were three generations
there, and they have been close to their neighbors for years. Why
do we get told these stories about how the family is broken in the
West?
Believe me, we have countless stories of these transformations,
so here is the question: How can we magnify the 25,000 exchanges
we do a year, which is what our resources allow, into something
10 times that? That is the question. Some of the ways that we can
do this we have been working on now as pilot studies. We can acti-
9
vate the 700,000 exchange visitors we have had over the years. You
know, we do not even have a data bank as good as a local car deal-
er. We do not know where these people are in some cases, and we
have not been able to follow-up on them.
We have got an alumni data bank in the works now, and what
we hope is, for those who are willing to join us and participate in
this, they will be able to be more successful in creating a more bal-
anced picture of the United States by simply talking about their ex-
perience. We are designing something wonderful called, An Amer-
ican Room, that will use virtual reality to depict and try to approxi-
mate the experience of being in America.
We might have the Gettysburg Address when you hit a button.
We might be able to see a scene from Oklahoma. We will have com-
puters linked to data banks. We will be able to reproduce a street
in a typical American city, and the viewer standing there can tap
another button and find someone like them in the United States,
and the wonder of this is the design team we have and the unlim-
ited potential of technology.
And here is the exciting thing. We hope to place these rooms in
universities, in libraries, and malls, and traveling even by bus to
smaller towns, and we have done enough exploring with potential
universities and libraries in the Middle East and so on to know
they are interested, and we expect this kind of thing to act as a
catalyst for more open dialog. The secret to communication is not
what you say, but what they can hear, and it is very important for
us to put it on those terms. We know we can greatly and produc-
tively increase visits from journalists, newspaper writers, and pro-
ducers, because now we follow them, and we can prove that when
they go home they publish from a totally different perspective.
We need to establish a regional media center to train Muslim
journalists and reporters in order to help them get a better per-
spective, better equipment, and more direct access to U.S. officials
and people. We can even turn the proven practice of teaching
English into a story of values and beliefs with the use of pictures
and music. We can ask our third parties who are already authentic
in the universe of the Middle East and Southeast and who wish to
participate to help carry out our messages, like the Muslim-Ameri-
cans that we have just been working with and have talked to over
a great period of time. They have just formed a group called
CAMU, and they are going to put speaker groups in their countries
and here and make exchanges and conferences and forums.
We can even offer to aid the leading satellite television stations,
NBC Lebanese, Al Jazeera, and Future, who say they are very
keen for new programming and assure us that they are open to
new material. Hollywood, PBS, and Discovery have offered to help
us acquire such programs.
We can, in fact, create completely new programs, like an Arabic
magazine for young adults, and Internet programs that include not
just the chat room but the training and the equipment, which I
think is probably the most efficient way to make sure there is a
two-way conversation, because one of the burning questions out
there in the Middle East and Southeast Asia is, can you hear us,
so we cannot afford to be in a one-way dialog.
10
You know, we already have a number of proofs against the fre-

quently repeated distortion that we are a materialistic and greedy
society. It is called USAID programs, and it bothers me immensely
that these stories are virtually unsung, because there is no man-
date in the U.S. programs to talk about what we have done, who
benefits, and how these stories unfold. I think we have many
uncelebrated stories of victory in the democratic process where we
have transformed families, we have made jobs, we have created an
enterprise, with the help of the people in many countries around
the world. These stories are not out there. If they were, the reputa-
tion and image we have, I think, would be different.
Even at this moment when it is really quite popular to dislike
the United States, we have found in some studies that we have
more in common. We have common values between the Middle
East and Southeast Asia and the United States in four main areas,
and they are significant. One is, we both rank in the top six faith,
generosity and giving and taking care of others, and love of family.
An interesting insight in that is that we have more in common
with these groups of people than, say, our partners in the Euro-
pean Union. Even those who rail against us one minute will imme-
diately turn and admit they would love to study American science
and technology, so to me the picture is actually promising, but we
do need to get about the business of preparing, testing, and fielding
these new programs. They are necessarily long term, and they
must be consistently supported to bear fruit, and we cannot neglect
our dialog with the rest of the world in order to shore up what has
been way too much silence between us and these communities, and
that is why this moment with you is so crucial to ask you to sup-
port importantly these longer term priorities as we move every day
to prove to you that they have merit.
Among our three strategic goals which I detailed in my written
remarks are representing Americas values and beliefs, dem-
onstrating clearly opportunities that can result from the forms of
democratization that each of these countries can take on, and the
third is education to the young. If you ask me to prioritize these,
I would say there is no contest. It has to be education to the young.
Ultimately it is the key, to educate these huge majority populations
of young men and women can save them from fanatical interpreta-
tions of this beautiful religion of Islam and give them access to
science, technology, books, and basically a new world view, and
that is a lot to ask.
Every experience we have tell us they will not settle for limita-
tions, biases, or hatred, and I have learned one other thing as I
have spent this time in public diplomacy. The young will lead us.
Last Saturday, I heard an eloquent address from Ehud Barak
about his journey as Prime Minister of Israel. He referred to a sig-
nature moment when his great friend fighting by his side 30 years
ago was shot by an Egyptian soldier. A young graduate student in
the audience from Egypt, a woman, addressed this question to the
former Prime Minister. My two friends were seeking to marry and
they went to their two parents, and they were told they could not
marry because they had a feud between these two families 30 years
ago, and therefore they recommended and refused permission to
marry.
11
The couple decided to go against this counsel. They did marry.

They are very happy. They have two small children, and they just
bought a very small new home. Her question is, why cant we,
rather than destroy homes, build them?
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Beers follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLOTTE BEERS, UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR
DIPLOMACY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Chairman Biden and distinguished members of the committee,
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. As you are well aware,
today is the nine-month anniversary of September 11th, a day that opened all our
eyes to the horrific consequences of hatred that some groups have for our country;
a hatred bred in ignorance, misperception and misrepresentation. There are many
lessons that we are still learning from that day, and certainly one of the most im-
portant is that we can and should do more to educate, and influence the attitudes
of, foreign audiences toward our country. No longer is it acceptable to let others de-
fine America, our beliefs, tenets, and values. It is in our collective national security
interest that we do a better job defining ourselves to the world. This is our mission
in the post-September 11th world, and it is a mission that must succeed.
In late February, Gallup released a poll of almost 10,000 people in nine predomi-
nately Muslim countries and found that, by a margin of two to one, residents of
these nations had an unfavorable opinion of the U.S. Some of the specific results
of the poll were not surprising in places like Iran, but in Kuwait for instance only
28 percent of those residents polled had a favorable opinion of the U.S. This in a
country that was liberated by the U.S. and our allies only a decade ago. In Morocco
the favorable number was only 22 percent, and in Saudi Arabia, one of our strongest
allies in the region, only 18 percent expressed a favorable opinion of the U.S.
These numbers are roughly consistent with other external and internal polling of
the region. They illuminate the challenge we have before us, a challenge to commu-
nicate our policies and values to the world more effectively. In some regions, such
as Muslim majority areas in the Middle East and South Asia for example, the chal-
lenge is obviously greater. In these places it is imperative that we reach out, inform,
educate, and persuade populations that we are a society that is based on certain
shared values, values that resonate within the Muslim world, values such as peace,
acceptance, faith, and love of family.
To do this, we must continue our traditional public diplomacy programs, such as
international information activities and educational and cultural exchanges, as well
as international broadcasting. However, we need to focus these activities on broader
and younger populations, while simultaneously enhancing them to reach our desired
audiences more rapidly and effectively. Since September 11th, and since my con-
firmation in October, we have striven to do just that. This is evident in such initia-
tives as The Network of Terrorism, a publication that has become the most widely
disseminated public diplomacy document ever produced by the U.S. Government.
The publication features dramatic visuals, including a map showing the 81 countries
that lost citizens in the World Trade Center. Since its release last November, Net-
work has been translated into 36 languages, and weve published over 1.3 million
copies. We had Network distributedas an insert in the Arabic edition of Newsweek,
and major excerpts appeared in other Arab and world publications. Since publica-
tion, we have maintained a constantly updated Internet version as well.
In addition to the Network publication, we have had success with our Television
Co-operatives, in which we sponsor the visits of foreign production teams to the U.S.
There have been 21 television programs since September 11th dealing with the Is-
lamic community in America, as well as the campaign against terrorism.
Our exhibit of the stunning photographs of Joel Meyerowitz, capturing the human
and material dimensions of Ground Zero, has now opened in 32 different countries
and will be presented in an additional ten countries by the end of the year, reaching
audiencesin the hundreds of thousands.
Our web sites dealing with the Middle East have consistently topped Internet
search engines since 9/11, and, thanks to our multilingual advertisements, our Re-
wards for Justice program has received some 30,000 pieces of information since the
attacks. We have produced This is Islam in America, a publication that was distrib-
uted to 500 Middle Eastern Imams at an April conference, as well as Islam in Amer-
ica, which was distributed through our American Corners network throughout Rus-
sia, and through our embassies in Almaty, Ashgabat, Baku, Bishkek, Dushanbe,
and Tashkent.
12
These initiatives highlight some of our successes, but there is clearly room for us
to improve, to do more, much more. Right now, the Middle East and the greater
Islamic world are awash with new media and new ideas and ideologies. We must
compete on a crowded playing field for the attention of these audiences. I will defer
to Governor Norm Pattiz to talk about the success of Radio Sawa, but it is evident
that we have work to do to make our television services effective and relevant. Tele-
vision is the medium of today and the future, as is evident in the growth and influ-
ence of Middle East television satellite and regular television broadcasting. Existing
channels are hungry for programming, and we need to direct resources to produc-
tion, acquisition, and distribution of compelling, quality programs. I am hesitant to
endorse the concept of a greatly expanded direct broadcasting capacity until a great
deal more research on how best to approach this market has been done. This is par-
ticularly true given the experience of BBCs expensive experiment in Arabic TV
broadcasting.
There is room for dialogue and exchange, but the onus is on us to make our voice
heard. There is common ground on which we can build the foundation for this dia-
logue. Let me illustrate this through the story of a young Arab woman. She is a
composite of Arab women I met recently. I was overseas at an-Arab capital, and this
woman started telling me of the anger and frustration that she and others feel
about our Middle East policy. She is a professor, but not at the American Univer-
sity, whose name she feels would taint her. Her anger was so great that, initially,
she expressed doubt that Bin Laden was the ringleader of the World Trade Center
and Pentagon attacks. As we spent more time together, she began to ask me about
what she understood to be the bad treatment of Muslims in the U.S. I was able to
tell her that there are between three and six million Muslims in this country, where
they are free to worship fully in over 1,200 mosques, and where their children can
attend Muslim schools. I told her about the Nobel Prize winner who is Muslim, the
soccer player, our basketball star whose father is an Imam, the schoolteachers, and
even President Bushs new Director of the National Institutes of Health. As I did
this, a door began to open between us. Eventually, she admitted that, while she be-
lieved Bin Ladin had masterminded the attacks of September 11th, she could not
defend her conviction to her colleagues. By the end of our conversation, she had
asked whether her university could add a U.S. studies program and even whether
she could travel to the U.S. with a group of teachers to study science and tech-
nology.
There is also the story of a Fulbright alumnus who is leader of Muhammadiyah,
Indonesias second-largest Islamic organization, with 30-40 million members. He re-
cently told the Jakarta Post that his educational experience in the U.S. had caused
him to abandon the idea of establishing an Islamic state in Indonesia. He cited his
degree in Islamic Studies from the University of Chicago, as a tool that helped him
gain a more accurate understanding of religious teachings. He also asserted that
fewer and fewer Muslims now want to establish an Islamic state.
This is the kind of share of mind toward which we are working. Shared ideas
and values are our building blocks to better understanding, better relationships, and
good will with the Islamic world. To help focus our public diplomacy efforts and
sharpen our ability to address the challenge before us, we have developed three
strategic themes under which our activities and efforts will be shaped. Under Presi-
dent Bush and Secretary Powells leadership, we are pursuing the following broad
areas in our public diplomacy efforts:
The first theme is shared values. In many countries, especially in Muslim ma-
jority states, people carry a distorted and negative view of U.S. values. They
believe that we are a faithless and decadent country. To counter these false im-
pressions, we are initially focusing on freedom of religion and tolerance as re-
flected in the experience of Muslims in America. We have already created a web
site and are developing video products and speakers programs to disseminate
this message overseas.
The second theme is the opportunity for Democratization. It is my belief that
democracy is the best path toward lasting peace and prosperity. Where good
governance and open opportunity exist, inspiring stories of entrepreneurial and
free market successes abound. Many U.S. government and private sector pro-
grams already address this objective, and we need to better highlight their ef-
forts. We must also encourage those who seek more open societies, economic op-
portunity through open-markets, and the chance to achieve prosperity in the
unique context of their own cultural and historical experience.
The third theme is Education, through an initiative called Partnership for
Learning. One of the universal values is that we all love our children and want
a better future for them. We also know that a lack of social and economic oppor-
13
tunity is one of the key factors driving the recruitment of terrorists. U.S. edu-
cational and other assistance programs already underway are working to pro-
vide children around the world with the tools needed for effective participation
in modern life. This focus will allow us to create new partnerships with the pri-
vate sector, here and abroad, dramatically increasing the resources devoted to
the education of children in countries where these options are limited.
These three themes create the backbone under which our public diplomacy pro-
grams and activities are taking shape thanks to the creative and dedicated efforts
of the public diplomacy professionals in the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Af-
fairs, the Bureau of Public Affairs, and the Office of International Information Pro-
grams, as well as our regional and function bureaus and our officers in the field.
We are also working to engage the private sector, which is our natural ally in this
fight to inform and influence the hearts and minds of the people of the world. Those
corporations with a large international presence, in many instances, have better out-
reach to certain countries and population segments than we do. We want to work
with them to create partnerships that serve our mutual interests. For its part, the
private sector stands at the ready as never before to aid our Public Diplomacy ef-
forts. We must continue to actively garner its support for our overall strategies, har-
ness its creative collective will, and ask it to organize for action.
Now, more than ever, the spotlight is on public diplomacy, on our ability and apti-
tude in communicating with the people of the world. I thank the committee for its
continued support of public diplomacy, and for allowing me to testify before you
today. I am happy to answer any of your questions.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary.

Mr. Pattiz.
STATEMENT OF HON. NORMAN J. PATTIZ, GOVERNOR,
BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. PATTIZ. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. I am Norm Pattiz of the Broadcasting Board of Gov-
ernors. On behalf of the BBG I want to thank you very much for
giving me the opportunity to talk about U.S. International Broad-
casting, and specifically our new Middle East Radio Network
[MERN], which is fast becoming a key part of U.S. public diplo-
macy efforts in this very, very turbulent region.
I also want to thank you for giving us the resources to accom-
plish our mission, which is quite simply to promote freedom and
democracy through the free flow of accurate, reliable, and credible
news and information about America and the world to audiences
overseas. I am pleased to appear with Under Secretary Charlotte
Beers who, along with Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage and oth-
ers in the State Department have been so supportive of MERN.
I would also like to introduce my fellow Governor, Tom
Korologos, who is in the audience. Tom has been a primary sup-
porter of the MERN project, making more than one trip to Cyprus
to talk with his friends, such as the President, to make sure we got
a very important transmission facility in Cyprus to help us reach
the region.
When I am not working for the BBG, I am chairman of
Westwood One, Americas largest radio network. We own, manage,
or distribute the NBC Radio Network, CBS Radio Network, Fox
Radio News, and we also supply over 7,500 U.S. radio stations with
not only news but sports, talk, information programming, and just
about anything else you can think of.
When I was appointed to the BBG in November 2000 I was the
only radio broadcaster on the Board. Chairman Marc Nathanson
asked me to serve as the cochair of the Language Review Com-
mittee, which manages the congressionally mandated process of de-
14
termining on an annual basis how effectively our resources are

being deployed across the over 60 languages we broadcast in world-
wide.
I quickly noticed our efforts in the Middle East were almost to-
tally ineffective. We were broadcasting 7 hours a day in the Arabic
language in a one-size-fits-all approach to the entire region, for 7
hours a day, as I mentioned before, on short wave, which almost
no one listens to, and out of a very weak medium wave signal out
of Rhodes. The fact was that over 98 percent of the audience in the
region were not listening to the Voice of America.
After reporting this back to the Board, I was asked to serve as
the chairman of the Middle East Committee. Shortly thereafter
I think it was in February 2000, well before the events of 9/11
I visited the region to determine what possibilities existed to pro-
vide a 21st century broadcast operation to the region. During the
trip, I learned a number of things. First of all, I learned that there
is, in fact, a media war going on in the region, and the weapons
of that war are incitement to violence, disinformation, hate radio,
government censorship, and journalistic self-censorship, and sadly
the United States did not have a horse in this race.
On the plus side, many of the moderate Arab governments were
willing to offer AM and FM frequencies and digital satellite fre-
quencies which would be necessary to create a state-of-the-art
broadcasting system. I felt that, by using proven American broad-
casting techniques that have been effective wherever they have
been used throughout the world, the opportunity existed to create
a service that would attract the largest possible audience and ulti-
mately deliver that audience to our message of public diplomacy.
What techniques am I talking about? Using radio in the way it
is most effective in todays media environment. Radio is a medium
of formatsmusic, news, sports, talk, et ceteradesigned to reach
a particular audience 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with a con-
sistent style that connects with our listeners.
In the case of MERN, which we call Radio Sawa, the Arabic word
for together, the format we have chosen is targeted at listeners
30 and under, representing well over 60 percent of the regions pop-
ulation. Sawa is music-driven, with 5 and 10-minute newscasts
twice every hour, 24 hours day.
But rather than describing to you in words what Sawa is, let me
play for you an English-language condensed version of what a 12-
hour of our Arabic programming sounds like. It runs about 312
minutes, so you will not hear any full music tracks, and you will
not hear any full newscasts, but it will give you a quick idea of
what this programming sounds like.
The CHAIRMAN. Before you play that, I want to point out that I
was so impressed with this disk that I made sure I requested that
Norm make it available to every Member of the U.S. Senate, every
Member of the House, and I hope, if any staff is listening, if you
have gotten it, make sure your boss just takes 5 minutes to listen
to it, play it for your boss, because I am telling you, it iswell, you
will hear.
Mr. PATTIZ. Well, this, as I say, is a condensed version of the 12-
minute version that you are talking about, so we are trying to give
15
you an example of what it sounds like within the parameters of the

time that I have to speak, so if you would play that, please.
[A CD was played.]
Mr. PATTIZ. What you just heard is a combination of proven com-
mercial know-how and modern broadcasting techniques, heavily re-
searched, so we know before we ever play our first song or broad-
cast our first feature or news program who our audience is, what
they like to hear, what type of news presentation features and pro-
duction values appeal to them. We also take into consideration
what is already available in the marketplace, and what has the
best chance of delivering the largest possible target audience to
hear our message. We call it marrying the mission to the market,
and it is working.
We are now broadcasting on FM stations in Amman, reaching
Jordan, the West Bank, and Jerusalem, in FM in Kuwait, Abu
Dhabi and Dubai, we are on medium wave or AM out of Kuwait
covering Iraq, as well as in Rhodes and, soon, Cyprus, which will
cover Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria, plus FM is coming online within
the next couple of weeks in Bahrain and Qatar. We are on three-
digital audio satellite transmissions similar to our own DirecTV,
with audio channels including Nilesat, Arabsat, and Eutelsat
Hotbird.
As you know by the impact of Al Jazeera and other TV services,
there are millions of satellite dishes throughout the region, and
now our message can be received on them. This is just the begin-
ning. We will be expanding our reach on FMs and AMs in the com-
ing months, but the anecdotal information that we are receiving on
the impact of Sawa since its March 23 launch has been nothing
less than amazing. Let me give you some examples from our own
embassies and bureaus throughout the region.
From our bureau chief in Amman, who was formerly the director
of our Arabic Service, the VOA Arabic Service: It is time for me
to say it. MERN leadership has been able to accomplish in the span
of a few months what two generations of VOA broadcasters have
failed to accomplish in more than 50 years. All indications are that
Radio Sawa is the most popular FM station in Jordan. Congratula-
tions. I am proud to be a member of the MERN team. And our
Ambassador in Jordan proclaimed; MERN is an instant hit among
Jordans young.
But it is not just insiders who are taking notice. Joshua
Muravchik of the American Enterprise Institute writes that MERN
is, good news, because it promises to repair many of the defects
of our current operation. And the New Republics Lawrence
Kaplan calls Radio Sawa a sober and effective public diplomacy
initiative.
From our listeners, some of which you heard when Senator Boxer
read a couple of those e-mails, we have received literally thousands
of overwhelmingly positive e-mails, some of which are in packets
that we have prepared for you. Dan Rather told us he heard Radio
Sawa in an outdoor cafe in Amman. Tom Brokaws producer told
us that Tom listened to Sawa on his trip to the region.
We are planning on doing full-out extensive audience research
and measurement before we move into our state-of-the-art broad-
cast center in Dubai Media City. Our network will then be broad-
16
casting in five targeted programming streams directed at specific

areas within the region in the colloquial dialects.
Mr. Chairman, when you and others on the committee asked,
after the events of 9/11, what are we doing to combat hatred and
anti-Americanism in the Middle East, we said, we are going to
launch a unique new network, unlike anything else you have heard
in U.S. international broadcasting, designed to attract the largest
possible audience, and this is it. The Middle East Radio Network
is like a wedding cake to which we are constantly adding layers.
Today, we are broadcasting music and news twice an hour, in 5
and 15-minute blocks, 24-hours-a-day, every day we are providing
coverage of major events like President Bushs speech on April 4
on the Middle East from start to finish in Arabic, plus complete
coverage of Secretary of State Powells recent trip to the region
with the kind of immediacy that was rarely possible to us in the
past.
When President Bush, in his October 2001 speech to the Nation
after the tragic events of 9/11, asked, in so many words, why do
they hate us, I believe one answer is because they do not know us.
All they hear about America and Americans is what comes from
sources that are invested in not presenting a truthful picture of the
United States to the world. Radio Sawa is the first step in pre-
senting our policies, our people, accurately from our own lips. Soon,
we will be broadcasting programs on policy, editorials, questions of
the day, and reviews and critiques of Arab press reports. We will
try to pinpoint and refute misinformation of state-controlled media,
and down the line we are looking at more interactive programming
on health, science, education, and other topical issues.
So when the taxpayers ask, what is the United States doing to
reach the Middle East and hopefully decrease regional tensions, we
can say, building a Middle East Radio Network. MERN is a proto-
type of the international broadcasting of the future and, as a cor-
nerstone of public diplomacy, U.S. international broadcasting and
MERN are a formidable means of getting Americas message across
to the Islamic world and elsewhere.
I very much appreciate your time and would be happy to answer
any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pattiz follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. NORMAN J. PATTIZ, GOVERNOR, BROADCASTING
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, Im Norm Pattiz
of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG).
On behalf of the BBG, I want to thank you very much for having me here to talk
about U.S. international broadcasting and specifically our new Middle East Radio
Network, which is fast becoming a key part of the U.S. public diplomacy effort in
this turbulent region. I also want to thank you for giving us the resources to accom-
plish our mission, which is, quite simply, to promote freedom and democracy
through the dissemination of accurate, reliable and credible news and information
about America and the world to audiences overseas.
When Im not working for the BBG, Im the Chairman of Westwood One, Amer-
icas largest radio network. Westwood One owns, manages or distributes the NBC
Radio Network, CBS Radio Network, CNN Radio News and Fox Radio News. We
supply over 7,500 U.S. radio stations with not only news, but sports, entertainment,
talk radio and informational programming.
When I was appointed to the BBG in November of 2000, I was the only radio
broadcaster on the Board. Chairman Marc Nathanson asked me to serve as the Co-
Chair of the Language Service Review Committee, which manages the Congression-
17
ally mandated process of determining, on an annual basis, how effectively our re-
sources are being deployed across the over 60 languages that we broadcast world-
wide. I quickly noticed that our efforts in the Middle East were almost totally inef-
fective. We were broadcasting seven hours a day of Arabic language programming
in a one-size-fits-all approach to the entire region on shortwave and a very weak
medium wave signal from Rhodes. Over 98 percent of the audience of the region had
never listened to the Voice of America.
After reporting this back to the Board, I was asked to serve as the Chairman of
the Middle East Committee. Shortly thereafter I visited the region to determine
what possibilities existed for building a 21st Century Arabic language broadcast op-
eration. During the trip I learned a number of things. First of all, theres a media
war going on and the weapons of that war include disinformation, incitement to vio-
lence, hate radio, Government censorship and journalistic self-censorship, and the
United States didnt have a horse in this race.
On the plus side, many moderate Arab governments were willing to offer FM and
AM frequencies and digital audio transmission, which would be necessary to create
a state-of-the-art distribution system. I felt that by using proven American broad-
casting techniques that have been successful all over the world, the opportunity ex-
isted to create a radio service that would attract the largest possible audience and,
ultimately, deliver that audience for our public diplomacy mission. What techniques
am I talking about? Using radio the way it is most effective in todays media envi-
ronment. Radio today is a medium of formatsmusic, news, sports, talk, etc.de-
signed to reach a particular audience 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with a con-
sistent style that connects with its listeners. In the case of MERN, which we call
Radio Sawathe Arabic word for togetherthe format weve chosen is targeted
at listeners 30 and under, representing well over 60 percent of the regions popu-
lation, which is music-driven with 5 and 10 minute newscasts every hour, 24 hours
a day.
Radio Sawa is an example of combining proven commercial knowhow and modern
broadcasting techniques, heavily researched so we know, well before we ever play
our first song or broadcast our first feature or news program, who our audience is;
what they like to hear; what type of news presentations, features and production
values appeal to them. We also take into consideration what is already available in
the marketplace and what has the best chance of delivering the largest possible tar-
get audience to hear our message, We call this marrying the mission to the market,
and its working.
We are now broadcasting on FM stations in Amman, reaching Jordan, the West
Bank and Jerusalem, and FMs in Kuwait, Abu Dhabi and Dubai. Were on Medium
Wave out of Kuwait, covering Iraq, Rhodes and soon Cyprus to Egypt, Lebanon and
Syria. We are on 3 digital audio satellite transmissions, similar to our own DirecTV
with audio channels, including Nilesat, Arabsat and Eutelsat. As you know by the
impact of Al Jazeera and other satellite TV services, there are millions of satellite
dishes throughout the region and now our message can be received on them.
This is just the beginning. We will be expanding our reach on FMs and AMs in
the coming months, but the anecdotal information that we are receiving on the im-
pact of Radio Sawa, since its March 23rd launch, has been nothing less than amaz-
ing. Let me give you some examples from some of our own Embassies and Bureaus
in the region:
From our Bureau Chief in Amman:
It is time for me to say it: The MERN leadership has been able to accom-
plish in a span of a few months what two generations of VOA Arabic broad-
casters have failed to accomplish in more than fifty years. All indications
show that Radio Sawa is the most popular FM station in Jordan. Congratu-
lations . . . I am proud to be part of the MERN team.
Best regards.
Mahmoud Zawawi
And our Ambassador in Jordan proclaimed MERN an instant hit among Jordans
young. But its not just insiders who are taking notice. Joshua Muravchik of the
American Enterprise Institute writes that MERN is, good news, because it prom-
ises to repair many of the defects of our current operation. And the New Republics
Lawrence Kaplan calls Radio Sawa a sober and effective public diplomacy initia-
tive.
From our listeners we have received literally thousands of overwhelmingly posi-
tive e-mails, some of which are in the packets that we have prepared for you. Dan
Rather told us he heard Radio Sawa in an outdoor cafe in Amman. Tom Brokaws
producer told us that Tom listened to Sawa on his trip to the region.
18
We are planning on doing full-out extensive audience research and measurement
before we move into our state-of-the-art broadcast center in Dubai Media Center.
Our network will be broadcast in five targeted programming streams in local dia-
lects, directed at specific areas in the region.
Mr. Chairman, when you and others on the Committee asked, after the events
of 9/11, what are you going to do to combat hatred and anti-Americanism in the
Middle East, we said we were going to launch a unique, new radio network, unlike
anything youve heard from U.S. international broadcasting, designed to attract the
largest possible audienceand this is it. The Middle East Radio Network is like a
wedding cake to which we are constantly adding layers. Today we are broadcasting
music with news twice an hour, in 5 and 10 minute blocks, 24 hours a day, every
day, plus coverage of major events like President Bushs April 4th speech on the
Middle East from start to finish, in Arabic, plus complete coverage of Secretary of
State Powells recent trip to the region, with a kind of immediacy rarely possible
in the past.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, when President Bush, in his Octo-
ber 2001 speech to the Nation, after the tragic events of 9/11, asked in so many
words why do they hate us, I believe the answer is because they dont know us. All
they hear about America and Americans comes from sources that are invested in
not presenting a truthful picture of the United Statesand the world. Radio Sawa
is the first step, presenting our people and policies accurately from our own lips.
In the not too distant future, well begin broadcasting policy programs, editorials,
questions of the day and reviews and critiques of Arab press reports. Well try to
pinpointand refutemisinformation in the state-controlled media. And down the
line, were looking at more interactive programs that feature health, science, edu-
cation and other topical issues.
So when taxpayers ask what is the United States doing to reach people in the
Middle East, and to, hopefully, decrease regional tensions, we can say: Building a
Middle East Radio Network. The BBGs FY 2003 budget request includes funding
for the second year costs of the network.
We appreciate the support weve received from Congress in getting the Middle
East Radio Network up and running, and in funding surge broadcasts in times of
crisis. We look forward to working closely with you in the future as we, through our
broadcasts, talk directly to people around the world about who America is, and for
what it stands.
MERN is a prototype of the international broadcasting of the future. And as a cor-
nerstone of public diplomacy, U. S. international broadcastingand MERNare for-
midable means of getting Americas message to the Islamic world and elsewhere.
I appreciate your time and Id be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I am delighted that the

press got to hear that very truncated example of the format of
Sawa, and I recall when I met with you privately about this you,
paraphrasing, basically made the point, you have got to get them
to like listening to the station. You have got to make it popular if
they are going to listen to the news, and I am assuming that this
is going to do something more than promote Britney Spears
records in Amman.
One of the things that did surprise me, and I am embarrassed
to say this, but I suspect I am not unique among Americans, or
even American Senators, and that is how popular rock stars are,
including indigenous rock stars, in the countries that we are trying
to have our voice heard, and you gave me an example.
I wish you would repeat it, because I do not want to get it wrong.
Even before you got Sawa up and running there was an Egyptian,
I believe you said, and maybe a Jordanian rock star that were per-
forming in Los Angeles. They were on tour, and you indicated to
me you had the idea of being able to go send your folks over to
interview them and then replay what they had to say about Amer-
ica in their words back in Egypt and in Jordan. Would you mind
repeating that very truncated version again of that story for the
folks here?
19
Mr. PATTIZ. Sure, absolutely. There were two Arab artists who
were touring the United States, Hakkim and Khaled, and we not
only interviewed them and the Arabic-speaking people in the audi-
ence who were at the performance in Los Angeles, we recorded the
entire concert, so that we will be able to take that concert that was
performed in Los Angeles and broadcast it back to the region with
comments from Hakkim and Khaled and many of the people who
attended the concert about their impressions of Americain the
case of the artist, what it is like to tour America, what the dif-
ference in the audiences between Los Angeles and New York might
be liketo really create, if you will, a cultural exchange on the
radio.
And of course, knowing the importance of music artists to a
music-driven format, music is a tool to attract an audience. We are
very, very conscious of what our mission is, but the music attracts
the 30-and-under, and specifically 25-and-under audience that we
are really going after. So what we are doing right now in the region
in our bureaus is having music personalities and stars doing liners
and promosyou are listening to radio Sawa, this is whomever
to really connect with our audience. Because the first thing we
have to do, of course, as you said before, Senator, we have got to
get them to listen to us, and we have got to get them to like us,
and on this level I think we are succeeding.
The CHAIRMAN. One of the things you had indicated to me is that
you were not surprised, but that others were surprised atyour
interviewer asked these Egyptian and Jordanian rock stars what
their impressions of America were, and they did what Secretary
Beers had said in another context, is that they were saying things
like, I was told they were not going to like us, and people would
look at us funny, and that people didnt like Muslims, and you
know, I went to a mosque and there are people here, et cetera. Am
I accurately portraying
Mr. PATTIZ. Absolutely, because I think it is really important to
be able to use stars from the region to talk about their positive ex-
periences about the United States and America and Americans and
broadcast those back into the region. It is a very important tool.
The CHAIRMAN. Now, I will ask one last question and yield here.
I have so many, but others do as well. One of the things that is
being discussed, and is being discussed among us, Senator Lugar
and others have a piece of legislation on this, I have a piece, the
House has passed a piece of legislation relating to public diplo-
macy, and one of the things we are going to get into fairly quickly
will be in effect my words, not either of yours, the next stage, what
do we do with that other medium, television, and do we attempt
to compete there, and I may be mistaken, but based on your writ-
ten testimony I think there may be a slight difference in your
views about that. I do not know that for certain.
Now, Madam Secretary, in your statement you say, and I quote,
television is the medium of today and the future, as is evident in
the growth and influence of Middle East television satellites and
regular television broadcasting. Existing channels are hungry for
programming, and we need to direct resources to production, acqui-
sition, and distribution of compelling quality programs. I am hesi-
tant to endorse the concept of a greatly expanded direct broad-
20
casting capacity without a great deal more research on how best to

approach it as this market has done. This is particularly true given
the experience of the BBCs expensive experiment with Arabic TV
broadcasting.
And Norm, you had indicated to me, and I cannot find the state-
ment now, but you had indicated to me personally that you thought
this held a great deal of promise, and that it is a place we should
be moving, as I understood you, more rapidly than it appears,
Madam Secretary, you think we should. Can you explainand that
will be my last questionexplain more about the experience of the
BBC and how you think we should proceed, and then you, Mr.
Pattiz, and then I will yield to Senator Lugar.
Ms. BEERS. Well, I think that the message from the attempt of
BBC to do a successful Arabic television channel is simply that it
is very difficult to pull off well, and even VOAs television efforts
have sometimes been less than productive, so it is a big boys game,
and we already have very aggressive and a widespread satellite tel-
evision in very good band positions with the four top Arab net-
works. However, I do agree that television is extremely intrusive,
and a very important and growing, actually, medium in this crucial
part of the world.
I also agree with the initiatives, the 9/11 initiatives that talk
about spreading the word and getting it out. The model on the
MERN is very impressive. I mean, Norm has followed all of the so-
phisticated techniques we use in marketing and modern commu-
nication to make this launch of MERN a significant success, but for
me it comes down to allocation of resources and I am really con-
cerned about all of the work we do in the State Department that
has to do with long term transformation exchanges as well as get-
ting the word out and getting the word back in, and so I refer to
those programs with which we have had great success, and I just
want to be sure that we can support these and magnify them.
So to me, it is the tensionno one here is surprised about the
budget and how we allocate resources.
The CHAIRMAN. I think that is a logical concern, because if you
look backand I will not bore the committee with it now, but if
you look back at the total amount of money we spent on public di-
plomacy 15 years ago, it is more than we are spending now.
Ms. BEERS. And we have many more countries and fewer people,
and the dilution of resources is a shocking issue.
The CHAIRMAN. I for one parenthetically think we are going to
have to significantly increase the resources we devote to this. I
think we have our priorities wrong, but at any rate, Norm, would
you respond to the television piece?
Mr. PATTIZ. Yes, I would be happy to. First, let me say that if
it turns out to be the will of the Congress or the administration
and all the powers that be that the Broadcasting Board of Gov-
ernors initiate a satellite Arabic language television station in the
region, I can assure you that it will be a first class operation. Radio
and television do different things. MERN is designed to focus on
a target audience that really is not the primary television listener,
the 25-and-under adult, basically probably between 15 and 25, and
engage them in a way that reaches them where they live on the
radio. As I said, radio is a medium of formats.
21
Television is a medium of programs. Radio says a lot about who

its listeners are. I dare say if I stepped into any one of your vehi-
cles and took a look at the settings on the radio, the buttons that
you have preset, that I could tell a lot about who you are just by
taking a look at those settings. It is like walking into somebodys
house and looking at the magazines that are on the coffee table.
If there is a magazine about tennis, you can be pretty sure that is
probably one of their key interests. That is what radio is.
Television is completely different. People are not loyal to a tele-
vision network or a television station. They watch programs, and
they turn the dial all the time, which gives us the opportunity to
be more hard-hitting in our approach. If we wind up saying things
that are hard-hitting on a television program it is probably not
going to turn the audience off from watching that channel or keep
them from going back to programming that they like to watch, and
quite coincidentally going back to the controversial programming
as well.
The BBC example is a good example of a situation that did not
work. But let me tell you why it did not work, which I think bodes
well for the way we would do it. The reason that it did not work
was, it was a co-venture with Orbit, a satellite company that is ba-
sically a Saudi company, where the BBC was providing program-
ming and Orbit was putting up the money and the distribution.
Well, for an operation like the BBC, who needs to have its own edi-
torial integrity, that kind of a situation I think was doomed to fail-
ure, because they started putting programming on that service
which was objectionable to the Saudi Government and the service
went away.
What we are talking about doing is putting up our own satellite
channel so that what we put on that satellite channel we program
from start to finish, whether it is 18 hours a day, or 24 hours a
day. What we really do in television right now is, we are a syndica-
tion company. We produce a program, and then we go to local pro-
viders and ask them to carry that program.
Well, believe me, the hard-hitting stuff is never going to see the
light of day on local media. They are not going to carry it. And we
cant control the other things that they put on the air. We have the
example of the Secretary of State having his comments aired on Al
Jazeera, immediately followed by people who tear apart everything
he just said.
We need to control what the programming is before the program
and after the program. In television there is a concept called audi-
ence flow. Even though television is a medium of programs that are
not necessarily the same from hour to hour, television tries to ap-
peal to a particular audience and then carry that audience through
to the next program.
For instance, you start on the morning showand believe me,
this is right off the top of my headif we were going to do some-
thing, it might be likely that we start with a morning show, fol-
lowed by a CNN or Fox type news programming period going into
the midday, where you might want to go to more entertainment-
oriented programming that was more family oriented, because
there are kids and mothers and people around in that time period,
moving back into in the late afternoon and early evening with more
22
hard-hitting traditional news type programming, and following up

with entertainment programming after that.
Let me just say this, in conclusion
The CHAIRMAN. That is all right. This is very important. Do not
worry about your time.
Mr. PATTIZ. If we were going to do a project like this, if we were
given the go-ahead to do a project like this, rest assured that it
would be completely researched the same way we did MERN, ex-
tensively researched, so we knew who we were talking to and what
our chances for success were program by program. We would put
together a blue ribbon panel of advisors, many of whom I have in-
formally talked with about this already, including the heads of
major communications companies and movie studios who I believe
would be very helpful, at least in terms of the entertainment pro-
gramming in providing programming for us in a way that would
show their patriotism. Let me also say that in the House bill I
think there is $135 million in that bill for new broadcasting initia-
tives, about $65 million of which is for an Arabic satellite TV chan-
nel.
The CHAIRMAN. I thank you very much. There is a vote on. I am
going to yield to you, Senator Lugar, now, as I should anyway, and
I am going to go vote, and maybe we can continue to keep this
going. Thank you.
Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Pattiz, I think the statement that you just made, your de-
scription, really, of the skill of American broadcasters and tele-
vision broadcasters is tremendously important. I hope it is not in-
appropriate, I would suggest that CSPAN cover this and make life
easier for us so that there is a constituency in our own country that
understands the genius of American broadcasting and how things
happen, how they are put together, and why the plan you have
suggested has I think every hope of being a much better one than
past efforts.
My first question, and I will try to encapsulate all of them so
that both of you can comment on them. I am just intrigued by how
much development there has been in the methodology of polling, or
of marketing surveys or whatever you want to call them in these
countries.
Clearly, if you are able to gain data, it is important it is used
to make certain that the radio or the television efforts are success-
ful. The acquisition of data and information to guide our efforts is
extremely important. An understanding of the attitudes and per-
ceptions the world has toward our country, our values, our policies
is extremely important. The purpose of our public diplomacy must
be to make certain not only that we have listenership and in fact
people are paying some attention, but in the course of time that we
are engaging ideas.
Now, likewise, the other side of the coin is what kind of public
diplomacy responsibility we have to bring some support of inde-
pendent media that arise, indigenous media from these countries,
that is important, too. In addition to our ambitious, sometimes
even aggressive efforts in public diplomacy, we must also be mind-
ful that the freedom of expression must really come from the heart
of these countries, and that is a more delicate operation.
23
Now, the National Endowment for Democracy supports inde-

pendent media with modest grants to various entities. That was
true throughout the cold war in Eastern Europe and Southeast
Asia, but these have been very, very modest and are often in dan-
ger of obliteration by congressional lack of appropriation. I am curi-
ous as to how we can coordinate both of these situations. That is,
to find out really what people are thinking so that we are success-
ful in our broadcasting and overall objectives and how we can help
develop independent media in those countries.
And finally, who will be in charge of it? Does this come with
Under Secretary Beers, or with the Broadcasting Board of Gov-
ernors or with the State Department, USAID? In other words, I am
not certain I have been able to trace what I think is sometimes de-
scribed as a fragmented authority. Can you respond to any of that?
I would like to hear from both of you, if I might.
Mr. PATTIZ. Let me respond to the last question first. In terms
of who would be in charge, I think this is clearly a job for the
Broadcasting Board of Governors, and I think one of the primary
reasons that the Broadcasting Board of Governors exists and is ef-
fective is because Congress in its wisdom created the Broadcasting
Board of Governors to serve as a firewall between the independ-
ence of its journalists and the pressures that would come from out-
side influences, maybe places like this, or the State Department, or
the administration, what-have-you. If we do not have credibility,
we are lost, especially in a region where you have to do a real Ka-
buki dance to get the information across and get them to listen.
I always loved what Secretary Beers said when she said, it is
not what you say, it is what they hear. So if we were to go out
and do something, and this were to be under the purview of a gov-
ernment agency other than the BBG, I would be concerned about
being able to protect the independence of our journalists.
On the research question, there are places where we can do very
sophisticated research and there are places where we can do noth-
ing more than anecdotal research. In the places where we can do
sophisticated research, which is a large part of the Middle East, we
utilize Western research companies. In our case, we go out and find
companies that do research for radio and television, the kinds of
things we are interested in putting on the air. They put together
the methodology and subcontract with local research entities in the
region who actually go out and conduct the surveys.
Does it tell us anything about local attitudes? Absolutely, it does.
The first question we asked in our research for Radio Sawa was,
Would you listen to a radio station that was brought to you by the
United States of America? Forty percent of the people we inter-
viewed said no, but that means 60 percent said yes, and my per-
sonal feeling was that of that 40 percent who said no, probably half
of them were going to listen to it anyway but did not want to say
it to an interviewer.
So we also know that, although there is a clear lack of support
for U.S. policies in the Middle East, American values of democracy
and freedom of choice and self-expression definitely resonate with
the Arab street, so that kind of information is very much available.
I can go on and talk about the indigenous media if you like, but
maybe Charlotte would like to comment.
24
Senator LUGAR. Let me ask quickly, do we have enough people

involved in this who understand the languages, the idioms, and
what-have-you? You mentioned you have five dialects on one of
your radio programs, but the thing we heard today, does this ap-
pear in many languages so that essentially people would under-
stand what you had to say?
Mr. PATTIZ. Absolutely. The service, Radio Sawa, is an Arabic
service, but there is the Arabic that is spoken in the gulf, there is
the Arabic that is spoken in Iraq, there is the Arabic that is spoken
in Egypt, which is a more classical style. One of the reasons why
we want to have five directed programming streams is, since radio
is such a personal medium and relates so directly to the listening
audience, it is very important that they are listening to someone
who is speaking to them in their own language with their own idi-
oms.
We have a very talented news director who we have hired, a gen-
tleman by the name of Mouafac Harb, who was formerly the Wash-
ington bureau chief for Al Hayat, managed the Lebanese radio and
television network, and was the Middle East correspondent for
Newsweek. He is very talented, is an Arab-American, who under-
stands the dialects, and we have been able to surround him with
a team of professionals who understand exactly what you are talk-
ing about.
Senator LUGAR. Secretary Beers.
Ms. BEERS. I think your question about research is very insight-
ful, because I just noticed a new poll recently that said how much
Muslim youth like America, in complete contrast to what we have
been hearing, so how you ask the question is, in fact, an art form.
We just prepared some messages that are like minidocumentaries
on Muslim life in America as a way of opening the door to a dialog
on faith. If we went out and said, look how faithful we are, we
would not have any listeners, so we talk about this amazing story
of Muslim life in our country as a way of opening the door.
These documentaries will run in Middle East television satellite
stations, and we have a media program ready to go. Importantly,
though, we use those messages as a stimulus to do consumer re-
search, which is not typically done in any of our organizations.
That is why Norm and I like to share the research we get in, and
one of the things we learned is how to talk about it. For example,
in every case they came back and said, show us pictures of our peo-
ple in the company of other Americans. Well, we did not have that
in the visuals. It is a very important indicator of self-esteem. Am
I part of the group? Are you accepting me?
So every time we do these pieces of research we come back with
a data bank we are collecting on what causes the attitude? Can you
get past the policy issues into long-term attitudes? We just feel
that a news study in all the Muslim countries, it is much more am-
bitious in terms of asking about attitudes and feelings. If we can-
not pull out the feelings we really cannot properly address the pro-
grams.
The interesting thing was, people predicted that they would not
like to see all of these overt messages from the United States and
the general response back was, tell me more, and then we learned
we have to do this research from Indonesia, where we started some
25
of the studies in Jakarta. In each case we learned how much em-

phasis to put on faith. We are doing a soccer player, we are doing
a TV documentary on the Egyptian Nobel Prize-winner, we are
doing Iman and his family, and we have all of these fantastic cross-
populations in the United States.
The same thing in a way is what we find about independent
media. I find when the media becomes freer and more independent
we are much closer to being able to describe the process of law, the
rule of law, the democracy. We just saw something amazing hap-
pen in Kosovo, which is just beginning to have a lot of media that
is free to experiment. They did their own series on rule of law and
democratic process, but that can be deadly dull.
In fact, they brought in local actors, they produced something
like a soap opera within the embassy and their people and the local
actors, so that you could not only see and hear what the process
is about, but because of the independent mediathis was a small
television station. Its success was so clear that the big, state-owned
media people bought the program, so it is not just independent
media, it is training them, giving them program content, and
teaching them how to do something that attracts the audience.
The last thing was about who is in charge. I think the structure
we now have at the State Department is clearly responsible for any
and every articulation of editorial policy, and as a member of the
board of BBG I get to wear both those hats, and it is very construc-
tive. I think our collaboration is first-rate. I know we have all
worked on it, importantly, but for example, Radio Sawa now has
its next obstacle path, which I think I am very comfortable with
the approach in this of producing editorials and more U.S. advocacy
in such a way that these audiences can hear it, as opposed to turn
away in distrust and cynicism.
Senator LUGAR. Let me intervene at this point, because I am ad-
vised there is a minute-and-a-half left in the first vote, and Senator
Dodd and I will want to vote and return. We are going to have an-
other vote immediately following this one, so the chairman has
asked that I temporarily recess the hearing.
Senator DODD. Before you do that, and I will recess it for you,
but I just wanted to commend both of you here for this effort. I
hope people hear what you had to say. I talked to Charlotte I think
a couple of months ago when the former Ambassador from Paki-
stan called me with the suggestion of doing this, and that is invit-
ing some of the very people who are most talented in producing
and putting together programming, to invite them, and it is not
new. You go back and look at the era of Franklin Roosevelt, what
he did with Bill Paley and CBS in Latin America, what he did with
the Disney companies.
There are plenty of historical examples historically where people
understood symbols in programming to be able to have some influ-
ence on the younger generation, so it is very exciting to have you
here. I regret I cannot come back after this to hear more of the tes-
timony, but I thank both of you, and really I like the idea of put-
ting up our own satellite. I have got to tell you, I think that is the
only way you are going to guarantee that we have some real influ-
ence in penetrating these markets. In the absence of doing that, I
26
think it is going to be very difficult in a lot of ways. The money

goes down the drain.
So I like that concept you are working on, and the invitation of
independent production companies even in this country to be able
to have access to these markets is a way also of having some influ-
ence, and so with that, we thank both of you, and I apologize again.
We will stand in recess until the chairman comes back.
[Recess.]
The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come back to order. I thank the
panel and the other witnesses for their patience. As Senator Hagel
just said, we just had a minor vote on raising the debt limit so we
would not default for the first time since Hamilton on the debt. It
was a very painful exercise to watch some of my colleagues do this.
I am already in the tank anyway, so I have been voting responsibly
for 30 years, but not popularly on that issue, but at any rate, so
we may have a chance to get you more money because we may ac-
tually pay our debts.
But all kidding aside, Senator Hagel.
Senator HAGEL. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I am grateful, as we
all are, for your time this morning and preparation, and most of
all what you do for our country, especially at this historic, chal-
lenging time in the world. I wanted to go back to a couple of points
that you each made, and Norm, I would start with you. We have
had some opportunities to visit previously about what you are
doing, and I have not had an opportunity to hear the update which
you have provided this morning, which is most encouraging, and it
is about what you had framed and defined when we last met as to
what your objectives were and your intentions, and so I congratu-
late you and your colleagues, and even though you have a heavy
burden to carry, and Tom Korologos, nonetheless you have man-
aged to do well, so please extend our congratulations to your col-
leagues, your team for the job they have done.
And Secretary Beers, we will talk in just a minute here, but I
wanted to ask one question of you, Norm. In your conversations
with us this morning, you recited your observations after the trip
that you took and you documented that, and you talked about the
media war that was going on. Would you define in a little more de-
tail the competition that is out there? What are we facing here?
You mentioned it in general terms, but define it a little more
clearly. What is it that we are up against as far aswe understand
Secretary Beers approach, some of this as well, but the kind of re-
sources and the technologies and the sophistication of the other
side of this that you are having to deal with, not just the under-
lying philosophy, but the assets on the other side?
Mr. PATTIZ. Sure. I have to say I just recently returned from a
trip to the region, where I spent a good deal of time in the gulf in
places like Doha and Manama in Bahrain, and also in Dubai, and
I had never spent that kind of time in the region. I had only been
in Doha before that, and I was very much impressed with what I
saw. Doha is, of course, the home of Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera is the
Arab satellite station that is most well-known by Americans, most
likely because of the joint agreements that it has had with CNN
and others over here.
27
But Al Jazeera is not the most-listened-to satellite TV service or

media outlet in the region. There are significantly larger outlets,
and what you have throughout the region is very sophisticated
technology. When I went to Abu Dhabi and saw that, it is like Em-
erald City. I mean, it is like a brand-new city. People who think
that is like walking through Amman or Cairo, forget it. The things
they have, and the new media center and high technology centers
they are building in those regions are incredible. We are going to
locate our Middle East Broadcast Center in the Media City in
Dubai, and there are a whole lot of other international broad-
casters that are doing the same thing.
So they have the resources, and they definitely have the support
of their governments, because in the case of a place like Qatar, for
instance, Al Jazeera has really put them on the map. Without Al
Jazeera most people would not know how to pronounce it, how to
spell it, anything about it.
Al Jazeera, positioned itself as the Arab CNN. It is not. It is kind
of, CNN meets Jerry Springer. You know, they have news presen-
tation which is CNN-style, and then they have talk shows that are
inflammatory and inciteful and what have you, and that is not
unique. That kind of programming exists throughout the region.
The CHAIRMAN. It exists here in the United States.
Mr. PATTIZ. But that is somebody elses problem right now, and
I do not want to talk about that, because some of that might be
mine.
But anyway, to be serious, there are tremendous resources avail-
able, and there are multiple media channels available, and when
you get down to it, there are some radio stations, some of them
that are licensed and some of them that are not licensed, clandes-
tine radio stations that literally preach hate 24 hours a day, and
part of that has to do with us and what we stand for and what we
believe in.
So it is an incredibly challenging area, but I have to say that we
received very good cooperation from some of the moderate Arab
governments. I believe that it was a fairlywell, it was a pretty
easy way to show support after 9/11 for our war on terrorism for
some of our Arab friends, when some other activities we might
have requested would have been a little more difficult.
Senator HAGEL. Thanks, Norm.
Ms. BEERS. I want to comment on that before we leave it. These
organizations are always at the State Department looking for inter-
views and creating a dialog, and Chris Ross, my deputy and I, meet
with them, and they are undergoing the same kind of budget
crunch and profit issues that many organizations will go through,
especially television, and I think their number one problem coming
up is going to be programming. Like, the audience participation
and interest in Al Jazeera drops dramatically every time they lose
a bin Laden tape.
You also have to remember, some of their programming is actu-
ally helpful to us. For example, that last tape, which we did not
honor with a lot of response and dialog, included the confession of
one of the 19 hijackers. It had a profound effect on the media news-
paper journalists in that area, because they no longer attempted
any more to say that this was not bin Laden and al-Qaeda, which
28
they actually could hitch onto for a while, and so we have got to
deal with the fact that they can be uneven in their coverage and
sometimes positive.
And the other thing that is left out of this discussion is what
could happen if we help support independent news facilities at the
time that the government might show an opening or a welcoming
to that, as we just discussed for Kosovo and the power of that inde-
pendent medium, and those are variables in the mix.
Mr. PATTIZ. If I can give you one concrete example, since our tech
is sitting over there, what I would like to do, and this is very quick.
I do not even think it is 30 seconds of material. Let me play you
a lead-in to one of our newscasts in Arabic, and then I will trans-
late what comes right after that in English so that you can hear
the kind of information we are putting out. Story is about an Ara-
bic newspaper that is reacting to Radio Sawa. Can you just hit
that?
[A CD was played.]
Mr. PATTIZ. Now, I listen to this every day, and there are a num-
ber of stories that are going on, but I want to read you one of the
things it is reporting on, because it comes out of the Arab press,
as a matter of fact. It says, the danger of
The CHAIRMAN. Are you reading to us what we just heard in Ara-
bic?
Mr. PATTIZ. Im reading to you a commentary in the indigenous
press about that broadcast. The danger, of course, is not in the
music, it is in the news that usually begins with a moderate, neu-
tral tone that shifts gradually toward the terminology that serves
the United States interest in the area.
Radio Sawas Web site refers to a long-term U.S. interest. Long-
term means slow osmosis of terminology from one generation to an-
other. This technology does not serve our national interest, and
does not reflect our views of things. In the midst of the Church of
Nativity crisis, I used to hear phrases on Radio Sawa referring to
armed Palestinians trapped inside the church. This is not correct.
In truth, Israelis were the ones who were armed on the outside,
where the ones on the inside were unarmed.
Radio Sawa uses phrases like, parties to the Middle East conflict.
This is a very dangerous phrase that transforms the Zionist occu-
pation of Palestinian lands to a broader conflict between two neigh-
boring countries and, by default, denies the Arab cause and right
to retain the holy shrines important to Muslims.
This is the kind of stuff that goes on in the indigenous press that
we attempt to debunk in news reports that we put on the air point-
ing out the inaccuracies of many of those things, and I think that
relates directly to your question.
Senator HAGEL. It does, and I appreciate it, and it is helpful to
give us, as I said earlier, some definition of what generally you
were referring to.
Secretary Beers, may I ask you a question? Before I do, let me
express my gratitude to you and to your team as well for the work
you are doing. You said something to the effect, and I guess you
asked it in a rhetorical question type way, what about those under
20. I think that is the essence of everything we are about, or
should be about.
29
The military option is but one part of this war, an important one,
but only one part of it. Where you are focused and concentrated is
absolutely critical for the future of this country, the future of the
world, and I do not think I overstate that, and I am a strong sup-
porter of what you are doing here.
Something else you talked about, common denominator values,
love of family and faith, we need to do a far better job of connecting
that, and that is what you of course are doing, and Norm and oth-
ers, and we will work, as the chairman said here, to provide the
kind of resources you need, but you should know that you have a
lot of support up here, and that we need to go much further and
deeper and wider than we ever have here.
We are losing a war across the globe that we need not lose, we
should not lose it, and I think of Iran and the great debate we are
having in some of these areas among my colleagues up here. I
mean, here is a country of 70 million people where most of those
people were born after 1979. Now, why would we needlessly push
away an entire generation by a foolish policy, and that is why we
look to you and the educational gap and the cultural and informa-
tion gap that you are trying to fill, and through what Norm is
doing and his team, it works.
So I make that statement because I suspect occasionally you both
wonder if anybody is paying attention. We are paying attention,
and we are grateful for what you are doing.
Now, let me ask a question. You mentioned in your testimony,
Madam Secretary, the point about working with the private sector,
and by the way, I think we are all pleased that we are finally being
able to bring together the talent from the private sector and the
governmental sector, the State Department, other professionals
who have been at this, along with some creative touch that the pri-
vate sector brings, not that the government does not, but it is a
waste of resources when we do not do that, and this is a very good
example of how we are doing that, and we are doing it very well
and in the interests of this country.
But your point aboutyou say we are also working to engage the
private sector. Could you give us some examples how you are doing
that?
Ms. BEERS. Yes. I think that what is important is that none of
this effort at the moment is funded in terms of people ask, well,
if they are going to do it, why do we have to have any funding. Be-
cause of the sheer machinery of making contacts, building teams,
organizing dialog, making sure that the affinity for the embassy
and for the work that happens in the field is in sync, and it is com-
plex, but the good news is, I am often asked to give speeches, and
I choose those that have a large number of CEOs in the room. I
grew up with a lot of these people, and the basic response back is,
guide us, we will do this, and as you spend more time with the
multinational heads they tell you about the number of invitations
or requests they have, so part of what we have to do is coordinate
our efforts, which I think you have asked us about in the past.
The other thing we have to do is guide them somewhat by giving
them the kind of information you have been asking us about, which
is, why do they feel this way, and also what are the universal val-
ues that we can safely discuss. For instance, somebody used the
30
word, freedom, but that is one of the loaded words in terms of com-
municating with the Middle East and the Muslim population, so we
have to tap into our sophistication in our bureaus, and then guide
the outside world, the CEO and the multinationals.
But what is encouraging is, I had a meeting with, the head of
Johnson & Johnson who said, we have 4,000 people in the Middle
East. What shall we ask them to do? And Procter & Gamble and
Unilever and these companies make a point of hiring locals, and
they talk all the time about how their locals would ask to take
part.
Now, it is delicate, because you cannot send them out as mission-
aries, or ask them to be speakers on the road, but you can equip
them with, say, a wonderful discourse on the music of the United
States. You can show themwe can provide them with materials
and cultural insights, and speakers if they choose to activate them,
but the point is, they are the ones that have the resources to take
on the huge job of the very young, and that has a lot to do with
education and curriculum, and the things the State Department
and many other agencies are working on, but they have employees
and depth, and great understanding and daily dialog, and I think
we have to harness those assets.
Senator HAGEL. Well, thank you again. Mr. Chairman, thank
you.
The CHAIRMAN. I have many more questions of both of you. This
has been, and I am sure will continue to be, one of the best hear-
ings we have had in a long while. I think the point that Senator
Hagel makes, particularly to you, Secretary Beers, you have a lot
of friends up here. You are going to have the problem of us trying
to give you more resources, and maybe your outfit will not say, we
should give you those resources.
Ms. BEERS. I have noticed that problem.
The CHAIRMAN. But all kidding aside, and we have great respect
for you, you come from the private sector, and you come from a
high-powered portion of the private sector, and it has been an
asset, and we appreciate it.
I also want the record to show that you oversee a lot more than
just what we have talked about here today. There are many other
aspects of your responsibility, including a quarter-billion a year in
direct appropriations for the Exchange Bureau, including another
$150 million for the SEED Act and a lot of other things we are
spending money on that I want to ask you about, but I am going
to submit the questions to you in writing.
I am not doing this cavalierly. I would very much like some de-
tailed answers to these questions, because part of the legislation,
for example, that Senator Lugar has with Senator Kennedy, and I
support the notion, is this issue of, do we vastly increase our ex-
change programs with this area of the world? We necessarily and
successfully for 50 years made a significant investment in Eastern
Europe and Russia, and Europe generally, and I would argue it
paid off.
Dick and Chuck and I travel the world in our responsibilities.
Dick and I have been chairman or the subcommittee chairman of
Europe for years and years. I bet you 70 percent of the people who
are heads of state now, or people in positions of significant author-
31
ity are people who have been educated here in the United States
of America.
Ms. BEERS. One hundred fifty percent of the Worldwide Coalition
were all exchange students, and the number is much higher if you
just take down their second-level people, but one of the things that
was fascinating was the Freedom Support Act, and the fact that I
can go there and look at the capacity of the public diplomacy when
it was in a high support system, and the results are very impres-
sive, and you can walk into a town in a new emerging democracy
and find an information center, a library, a dialog going.
The CHAIRMAN. There was a fellow named John Ritch who used
to be assistant staff director up here. I get credit for having written
the so-called SEED Act, which was followed by the Freedom Sup-
port Act. It was John Ritchs idea, and that was the biggest thing
Dick and I fought for those centers, just having the physical capa-
bility of somebody being able to walk in.
It is kind of like what is happening now in every major corpora-
tion. They are building chat roomsfor example, there is ING,
which is a large banking system. I met with them in Delaware yes-
terday. They are building these chat rooms. The chat rooms are not
really chat rooms. What they do is, they have coffee shops with the
high-speed computers there where you can do banking online with
them and other things while you are sitting there having a cup of
coffee.
Well, these are very important things, and I just want you to
know, we know, and the public should know, your portfolio far ex-
tends beyond what we are talking about now, and I have a series
of questions, about a dozen, that relate to that aspect of your port-
folio. I do not want you to think because we are not getting to
them, it is not because they have an equal interest and con-
sequence here.
I would also point out, and I do not say this cavalierly, and I do
not say this because he is a personal friend, but Tom Korologos has
been involved in this for a long, long time, and had we the time
I would ask Tom to come up, but we have a long list of witnesses
to go here. Tom is one of the leading Republicans in this town, and
has been for years and years. This is not a partisan thing.
My former AA of 25 years and Tom, a guy named Ted Kauffman
and Tom have been friends for years. They both serve on the
Board. This is something that spans, and everyone should know
this, that spans the ideological divide, as we will sure see in a mo-
ment with Speaker Gingrich, who is incredibly articulate on this
subject.
So I just want you to know that I think it matters a lot. We have
a tendency to say, this is a historic hearing, and this isyou know,
we are self-important, but the truth is, I think this is one of the
most important hearings that we have had in a long time here, and
I want to particularly thank you, Norm, for doing what we have
a tendency in government not to do very well.
I always say to my staff, you have got to tell a story. You have
got to tell a story to the people back home. You cannot just give
them all the facts. You have got to tell a true story, and I know
you and I met for a long time over lunch, and you kind of looked
at me quizzically when I said, come and tell a story, play the disk,
32
connect the dots, a phrase that is becoming very popular here, but
what you did today to anybody listening to this is, they now picture
it. They now understand what they mean.
I do not have to say now to everybody as I push this, you know,
when you fly across the country and you put on the head set and
you listen to preprogrammed music, well, that is a guy named
Pattiz, and what does he do? He does things like, play the music
you like, and interview the artist, and the artists tell their story,
and you get into this whole thing. I said, that is programming.
That is what these guys and women are doing now on a much
broader scale, and people would look at me and say, I think I got
it.
But by playing that 312 minute CD, you cut through herein my
view you cut through a layer of confusion, a fog that now, when I
go home and say, look, I want to spend more money on thisI in-
troduced a bill that would have given you guys, and you helped
write it, about $14 billion dollars in terms of being able tofor
hard asset, and another $14 billion a year to make it run.
The President was enamored with it, and I guess at the last
minute he concluded that maybe we should go slower, and I am not
being critical. But the point is, we have got to make the public un-
derstand. This is a two-way communication. We have got to explain
to our folks back home why we are asking their very hard-earned
tax dollars to be spent on a radio station or a television station or
an exchange program with 1.2 billion, hopefully, eventually, now
much less, just focusing on the Arab portion of the Muslim world.
So I cannot thank you enough, and we are going to be calling you
back. Obviously, Charlotte, you will be back a lot. You are a critical
component here, but we are going to ask you and the Board to
come back. I have questions to you as well, in writing, on the rela-
tionshipand it is not meant to be pejorative, but the relationship
between the Board as Senator Helms and I and Senator Lugar and
others envisioned it when we did this reorganization and the State
Department. How is that working? But really and truly, what do
we do to make it better or worse? How can we help?
The last point I want to make, I want the record to show that
notwithstanding what my 21-year-old daughter might think, I do
not want to go down as a footnote in the history of this committee
as being the first chairman to bring rock and roll to the Foreign
Relations Committee. I hope I will be known for something beyond
that, but I cannot think of a time I walked out, one of the people
outside said, I have never heard rock and roll or Britney Spears
played in the Foreign Relations Committee room, so I think it is
a first.
We appreciate it very much. We look forward to having you back.
Thank you for great work, and we are going to be trying to see if
we canthat old bad joke, we are from the Federal Government,
we are here to help. We are going to try to see that you have the
assets and resources that you need. Thank you very, very much.
Mr. PATTIZ. Thank you.
Ms. BEERS. Thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. Our next panel is the former Ambassador to Mo-
rocco, and executive director and CEO of Northstar Equity Group,
Hon. Marc Ginsberg, the former Speaker of the House, Newt Ging-
33
rich, Mr. David Hoffman, president of Internews from Arcata, Cali-

fornia, and Veton Surroi, a very distinguished journalist from
Pristina, Kosovo, so we would ask all of those to come forward if
they can make it up here, and thank them for their patience.
Welcome. It is good to see you Mr. Surroi. Last time I met with
you we were in a different circumstance.
Let me suggest, notwithstanding the fact that a former Ambas-
sador is of higher rank, where I come from no one outranks the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, so we are going to start,
with all due respect to the rest of the panel, with former Speaker
Gingrich. Mr. Speaker.
STATEMENT OF HON. NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER SPEAKER,

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES; SENIOR FELLOW, AMER-
ICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. GINGRICH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to
thank you and Senator Lugar for holding a hearing on what I think
is in some ways one of the two or three most important topics
about Americas role in the world and Americas survival. I think
this is really important. I thought the first two panelists you had
were tremendous, and did a very good job in explaining the initial
steps that the Bush administration has taken, and I commend you
for encouraging further steps.
If I could try to summarize fairly quickly, as you well know we
live in an information age, and from television to the Internet to
radio and other mechanisms of public information, are actually de-
cisive in shaping public opinion and informing the public, and as
societies grow freer, the impact of public opinion grows more impor-
tant. I think traditional state to state diplomacy was the key to the
agrarian and industrial ages, but it is clearly inadequate in the in-
formation age.
If we in the United States cannot communicate with the people
of countries we care about, we cannot sustain government-to-gov-
ernment relations. When a people turn decisively against America,
their government will be increasingly at risk if it does not acknowl-
edge the views of their people. Thus, for example, in the 19811982
fight in Europe over matching the Soviet Union by fielding mobile
missiles, there had to be a very strong public information campaign
that sustained the diplomatic initiatives at the government level.
When we are faced with an organized, ruthless minority that is
gaining ground through dishonest propaganda and through vio-
lence, we have to both meet its security challenge and its informa-
tion challenge. In the late 1940s, a significant American education
and information campaign in France, Italy, Greece, and other coun-
tries played a major role in the survival of freedom and the defeat
of Communist tyranny.
When we win militarily, we also have to be prepared to win cul-
turally, educationally, informationally, and economically. People ev-
erywhere want to be safe, healthy, prosperous, and free. To the de-
gree they see America as their ally in that quest, they will be
strongly in favor of allying with America. We have to have fulfill-
ment campaigns in Afghanistan and other countries after we defeat
the extremist wing of Islam.
34
One of my strongest messages in the Pentagon has been, forget

exit strategies. They do not exist. They are nonsense. They are not
going to happen. Instead, think about fulfillment strategies that
enable governments like that headed by Mr. Karzai to create safe-
ty, which is the precursor to health, prosperity, and freedom, but
I recognize that we care about all four.
Let me also emphasize, we have been successful at doing this.
Germany, Italy and Japan after World War II became profoundly
different countries. South Korea after the Korean war was nur-
tured for many, many years by the United States from an authori-
tarian and to a dramatically open and democratic society. If we
apply the same techniques and the same investment of capital, val-
ues, and education we can succeed again today.
This requires a five-pronged continuing American effort against
extremist Islam, against those Islamic dictators who would acquire
weapons of mass destruction, against disorder and barbarism, and
genocide, and in favor of health, safety, prosperity, and freedom for
all people, and I want to emphasize I think it is a mistake to not
be clear that there is an extremist fanatic faction of Islam which
is prepared to impose tyranny on its own people and is prepared
to kill others, and unless you are willing to confront this and win
this argument, it is very hard to distinguished all of the decent,
honorable, hard-working people in Islam, many millions of whom,
6 million of whom now live in America, and live full lives pursuing
freedom and happiness within a religious framework which also
recognizes the rights of others.
I think there are five stages. First, that where necessary the
United States and its allies have to be the guarantor of physical
safety against the terrorists, the murderers, and the committers of
genocide. This is particularly a challenge, I think, in the Israeli-
Palestinian situation, but it is a challenge anywhere, that you have
a totalitarian regime or a terrorist movement that will kill those
who seek moderation and who seek freedom.
Second, having established safety, the United States and its al-
lies have to implement strategies of wealth creation based on pri-
vate property rights, the rule of law, and a rewarded work ethic.
That is, if you go to work, you end up being rewarded for it. Infor-
mation age technological infrastructure, for example, mobile phones
and the Internet, modern systems of health and health care, and
the culture of freedom and self-government.
I want to emphasize, this is only partially a resource issue. I
hope this committee will look carefully at how AID is structured,
will look carefully at the World Bank and at the IMF. The fact is,
if you took all the money spent over the last 40 years on the poor
parts of the world, you have to raise the profound question of why
it has not worked, and whether that is a question of strategies as
much as it is a question of resources. I think most of the failures
of development in the last four decades have been failures to ex-
ploit the ideas which underpin wealth creation, and that is largely
a function of public diplomacy, or public information operations.
Third, when we are confronted with a coherent ideological oppo-
nent such as Nazism, fascism, Japanese militarism, communism, or
the extremist fanaticism wing of Islam, it is necessary to develop
a countervailing intellectual communications effort on behalf of
35
freedom, modernity, and individual rights. Young people growing

up have to be given the choice between hatred, violence, and tyr-
anny, and the alternative of peace, opportunity, and freedom. Only
a systematic educational and public information campaign can real-
ly give them a choice. In our current conflict, the madrasas of ex-
tremism have to be replaced with schools that educate young men
and women into productive modern lives that are the basis of pros-
perity and integration into the modern world.
Fourth, in order to sustain these first three efforts, there has to
be a strategic public information campaign that explains to our
own people, our allies in Europe and around the world, the non-
fanatic, nonextremist elements in Islam, and others, of our efforts,
our sincerity, and our idealistic goals. This campaign has to be run
within a framework acceptable to the White House, but the White
House cannot run it.
The single key figure, probably Secretary Beers in the State De-
partment, should be empowered to coordinate all American public
information operations on a daily basis, coordinating with the
White House. To the degree possible, our allies in nongovernmental
institutions, including celebrities, should be recruited and included
and involved in a broad public information strategy and campaign.
I might note, for example, that Disney invented both a Brazilian
character and a Mexican character during the Second World War
who were very popular. These were cartoon characters interacting
with Mickey, proving that Mickey Mouse, the American, could work
with local folks. While that may seem simple, it was a very power-
ful and very subtle kind of cultural outreach that used celebrity
status.
Finally, the White House has to lead the daily and public infor-
mation effort, because the President is so decisively the primary
communicator of the American system. The White House should
shape and direct the first four stages, but it should implement only
the fifth stage.
And let me commend you for this hearing, because we are frank-
ly unprepared to engage in the scale of a public information cam-
paign and the sophistication that it needs to be to create safety in
the 21st century. I commend on the other side of the building
Chairman Henry Hyde for his important leadership in introducing
and passing out of committee the Freedom Promotion Act of 2002.
I know you have a similar initiative, which I want to commend you
and hope that in the short legislative schedule left, that it will be
able to move through the Senate and move ultimately into law.
Let me just close with this thought. The ultimate scale of re-
sources needed to defeat the extremist fanatic wing of Islam will
resemble the resources we used to defeat communism. The com-
bination of educational efforts, communications campaigns, covert
activities, economic assistance, and aggressive efforts to commu-
nicate our view of reality were the underpinnings for the nearly 50-
year containment of Soviet communism.
Creating a stable, safe world requires a public information capa-
bility and a public diplomacy capability far beyond anything we
have to date. I just want to suggest, Mr. Chairman, you were much
closer to right in the scale of resourcing we are going to need, and
folks ought to go back and look in constant dollars at what we in-
36
vested to save Europe in the forties and fifties and recognize that,
if we are serious about helping those people, the overwhelming ma-
jority in the Islamic world who want to have a better future, that
we have to be prepared to make the same scale of commitment,
starting in Afghanistan, but extending across the Islamic world. If
we do, we will succeed. If we do not, I do not care how many terror-
ists we kill, the conditions will simply create new waves of ter-
rorism.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gingrich follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES
Thank you, Mr. Chairman (Senator Biden), and thank you, Mr. Chairman (Sen-
ator Helms) for the opportunity to appear before you today.
As we are all aware, we live in an information age. Television, the Internet, radio
and other mechanisms of public information are decisive in shaping pubic opinion
and informing the public.
As societies grow freer the impact of public opinion grows more important. Where
state-to-state diplomacy was appropriate to the agrarian and industrial ages, it is
clearly inadequate in the information age. If we cannot communicate with the peo-
ple of countries we care about, we cannot sustain government-to-government rela-
tions. When a people turn decisively against us their government will be at increas-
ing risk if it does not acknowledge their peoples views. Thus, the 198182 fight in
Europe over matching the Soviet Union by fielding mobile missiles required a strong
public information campaign to sustain the diplomatic initiatives.
When we are faced with an organized ruthless minority that is gaining ground
through dishonest propaganda and through violence, we have to both meet its secu-
rity challenge and its information challenge. In the late 1940s a significant Amer-
ican education and information campaign in France, Italy, Greece and other coun-
tries played a major role in the survival of freedom and the defeat of communist
tyranny.
When we win militarily we also have to be prepared to win culturally, education-
ally, informationally and economically. People everywhere want to be safe, healthy,
prosperous, and free. To the degree they see America as their ally in that quest,
they will be strongly in favor of allying with America. We have to have fulfillment
campaigns in Afghanistan and other countries after we defeat the extremist wing
of Islam. Instead of exit strategies we have to create fulfillment strategies that en-
able governments like that headed by Mr. Karzai to create safety, health, prosperity
and freedom for its citizens.
We have been successful in the past and in Germany, Italy and Japan after World
War II, South Korea after the Korean War. If we apply the same techniques and
the same investment of capital, values and education we can succeed again today.
This requires a five pronged continuing American effort against the extremist fa-
natical wing of Islam against those Islamic dictators who would acquire weapons
of mass destruction, against disorder and barbarism and genocide and in favor of
safety, health, prosperity, and freedom for all people.
a. Where necessary, the United States and its allies have to be the guarantor
of its physical safety against the terrorists, the murderers, and the committers
of genocide.
b. Having established safety, the United States and its allies must implement
strategies of wealth creation based on private property rights, the rule of law,
and a rewarded work ethic, information age technological infrastructure, (e.g.
mobile phones and the internet) modern systems of health and healthcare and
the culture of freedom and self-government. This is only partially a resource
issue. Most of the failures of development in the last four decades have been
failures to export the ideas which underpin wealth creation and that is largely
a function of public diplomacy or publicinformation operations.
c. When confronted with a coherent ideological opponent such as Nazism, Fas-
cism, Japanese Militarism, Communism or the extremist fanaticism of Islam it
is necessary to develop a countervailing intellectual communications effort on
behalf of freedom, modernity and individual rights. Young people growing up
have to be given the choice between hatred, violence and tyranny and the alter-
native of peace, opportunity, and freedom. Only a systematic educational and
public information campaign can truly give them a choice. In our current con-
37
flict, the madrasas of extremism have to be replaced with schools that educate
young men and women into productive modern lives that are the basis of pros-
perity and integration into the modern world.
d. In order to sustain these first three efforts there has to be a strategic pub-
lic information campaign that explains to our own people, our allies in Europe
and around the world, the non-fanatic non-extremist elements in Islamic world
and others of our efforts, our sincerity and our idealistic goals. This campaign
has to be run within a framework acceptable to the White House but the White
House cannot run it. A single key figure, probably in the State Department,
should be empowered to coordinate all American public information operations
on a daily basis with the White House. To the degree possible our allies, in non-
governmental organizations, including celebrities, should be recruited and in-
cluded and involved in a broad public information strategy and campaign.
e. The White House has to lead the daily public information effort because
the President is so decisively the primary communicator of the American sys-
tem. The White House should shape and direct the first four stages but it
should implement only the fifth stage.
The United States is today unprepared to engage in a public information cam-
paign on the scale needed to create safety in the 21st century. I commend Chairman
Henry Hyde for his important leadership in introducing and passing out of Com-
mittee the Freedom Promotion Act of 2002. This important initiative provides for
a significant increase in our efforts of public diplomacy. While more must be done
this act is an essential first step and I urge the Senate to join in passing something
along those lines.
The ultimate scale of resources needed to defeat the extremist fanatic wing of
Islam will resemble the resources we used to defeat Communism. The combination
of educational efforts, communications campaigns, covert activities, economic assist-
ance and aggressive efforts to communicate our view of reality were the
underpinnings for the nearly 50-year containment of Soviet Communism.
Creating a stable safe world requires a public information capability and a public
diplomacy capability far beyond anything we have developed to date. The new
emerging information-age has new requirements for tactical information on a daily
basis and complex requirements for the Internet, cell phones, satellite television,
radio and long-term educational efforts. These activities can often be implemented
by non-governmental organizations but the resourcing and the general strategies
and systems implementation require government leadership.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Speaker, our usual practice is to go down

and have everyone speak, but Senator Lugar is going to have to
leave. Let me just say one thing to you. First of all, I literally
and I am not going to make any humorous comment about this
truly agree with everything you have said, especially your phrase,
fulfillment strategy.
If I can make an analogy, and I hope you will not be offended
by it, Senator Helms in the courageous step he took to help us
thread the needle of support for the United Nations by dealing
with our debt at the United Nations, had a dramatic impact on the
attitude and potential utility to us of the United Nations, not in
merely that it paid the debt, but that by Senator Helms standing
up, he essentially de-demonized the notion that we would partici-
pate at all in the United Nations. It was a gigantic, gigantic step,
and I would have been prepared to yield even more just to get him
to do that, and he did not need my convincing.
You are the single most articulate voice on the right, in my view.
I mean that sincerely, my word, and the fact that you would use
the words, fulfillment strategy, I think is the single most signifi-
cant contribution you can make, because as you know, I think the
President shares your view, but there are many on the right and
left who view it only in terms of exit strategy.
They are not willing toI had a debate with my very close
friend, a Democrat, and one senior Republican at the White House
38
on Bosnia, and the point that had to be raised was, I said, what
would we have done if you guys had prevailed in 1955 or 1960 or
Senator Mansfield had prevailed in 1961 or 1962 or 1963, and
withdrawn American troops from Europe. This is a long-haul deal.
Your stature, your significance, your ability to articulate is, I think,
maybe one of the greatest contributions you can make at this mo-
ment, because until we move, in my view, to this notion of a fulfill-
ment strategy, we are going to be in real trouble.
So I want you to know this forum is available to you any time
you want it. I mean this sincerely. You and I have been, not in a
personal sense but in a political sense at odds with one another on
many things over our careers, but I have great respect for you. I
am not being solicitous. I have great respect for you, and I think
the contribution you are making on this subject is even more con-
sequential than the contribution that Senator Helms made relative
to the United Nations, and I just wanted to say that while Senator
Lugar was here, and I apologize to the rest of the panel for inter-
rupting.
Mr. GINGRICH. Let me just sayand as you know, I have to
leave, but I want to say to both of you, I know how many years
both of you have spent criss-crossing the world and criss-crossing
the House and Senate trying to explain the world you have seen.
We are at one of the great turning points equal to the period 1947
to 1952, when we finally came to grips with our role in the world.
September 11and I cannot overstate the importance of the Presi-
dents own process, I think, of thinking this through.
September 11 said to the American people, either we are going
to learn to lead the world toward safety, prosperity, health, and
freedom, or the world will in the end tear us down because it will
not be able to stand the jealousy of thinking that only Americans
have those things. That has to be a cultural, educational commu-
nications strategy with a military component, not the reverse, and
one of the first big tests has to be in Afghanistan and, if I might,
to just take advantage of your very generous and, frankly, very
humbling comments, Senator Biden, I am very touched that you
would say what you did.
I believe if we could take the African initiative and rethink it as
a sub-Saharan initiative, and take Africa seriously enough to not
accept pouring money into the failed bureaucracies, but from the
ground up to design a genuine strategyand I would love to come
back and chat with the two of you and Senator Helms, and maybe
at some point ask that we might have a hearing on this topic con-
ceptually, I think doing the right things in the Islamic world and
the right things in sub-Saharan Africa, change who we are in the
world, changes the worlds understanding of us, and gives our
grandchildren a much safer and freer planet to live on, and I think
that is the goal. At least now that I have two grandchildren I am
more worried about their future than mine. That is the kind of
world I would like to live in.
So I would like to extend, if I might as a private citizen, come
and visit with you all and then maybe to later consider that pros-
pect.
39
The CHAIRMAN. I guarantee you, within the next couple of days

we will set up a time. I am anxious to do that. I know Senator
Lugar has to leave, and I apologize.
Mr. Ambassador, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARC C. GINSBERG, FORMER AMBAS-
SADOR TO MOROCCO; CEO AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
NORTHSTAR EQUITY GROUP, WASHINGTON, DC
Ambassador GINSBERG. Mr. Chairman, Senator Lugar, it is a
great honor to be here. My testimony, which I will summarize, is
focusing more on the ground war rather than on the air war.
Following September 11, I undertook as a private citizen several
initiatives to help both the U.S. Government and the private sector
focus additional effort and resources to recalibrate and improve our
public diplomacy initiatives in the Middle East. Mr. Chairman, I
was raised in the Middle East and have worked extensively in the
region, and I had the privilege of serving our country as Ambas-
sador to Morocco, and travel still extensively around this country
and the region to explain the history of Islam and the fight that
we are up against, to Americans as well as to others, but to rebuild
our power to persuade and to win that important war of diplomacy,
and public diplomacy in the war on terrorism, the United States
has got to understand why the Middle East sees us so differently
than how we see ourselves, and determine what resources we must
mobilize to turn the tide of anti-Americanism against us.
We can begin by opening up lines of communication that have
until now been off-limits and out-of-bounds by our diplomats. In an
article I offered in the Washington Post in October, I proposed the
creation of a new public-private sector United States Middle East
Policy Engagement Commission to promote two-way dialog and to
bring together under one roof the Nations leading Middle East ex-
perts.
This initiative, Mr. Chairman, led to the formation of an ad hoc
group of Middle East experts I helped convene to explore how the
private sector could support Americas public diplomacy initiatives
in the region and to assess what needed to be done to engage the
private sector in this effort. This steering committee has been
working throughout the spring to focus on three specific short-term
objectives, a media exchange program, the development of a dialog
Web site, and a plan to enlist and support entertainers respected
and admired in the Arab world.
I also serve on the Council on Foreign Relations Public Diplo-
macy Task Force under the chairmanship of Pete Peterson. This
task force, which includes over 60 experts, has devoted many
months of time and effort to develop a comprehensive blueprint for
improving U.S. public diplomacy, indeed, Mr. Chairman, to revolu-
tionize our public diplomacy functions. This report, which will be
issued shortly, will unveil many important recommendations for re-
organizing the public diplomacy functions within the U.S. Govern-
ment under a new Presidential directive.
It is clear to those like myself who have worked extensively in
the United States and abroad that the State Department, the
White House, and our embassies all need to be working more close-
ly together to fix a system that is simply not working well enough
40
to win the war of public diplomacy in the Middle East and beyond.
Despite the integration of the USIA into the Department of State,
public diplomacy and policy formulation are almost two ships pass-
ing in the night. The councils report will address these issues, and
I am confident, Mr. Chairman, you will find it an extremely impor-
tant contribution to your efforts to improve Americas public diplo-
macy programs.
I listened very carefully to what Norm had to say about tele-
vision media efforts that he and others are planning to do. I was
recently asked to serve on the board of directors of a new private
sector initiative known as Al-Haqiqa, otherwise, in English, the
truth, an effort to develop a new U.S.-private sector satellite tele-
vision station and program content for the Arab world.
Al-Haqiqa is currently planning, as its initial objective, to de-
velop American-style Arabic language news-oriented programming
to be broadcast on existing Arabic cable and satellite systems in
the Middle East. This effort has the bipartisan support of a very
distinguished group of American leaders, and is chaired by former
President George Bush. I hope Congress will encourage the media
program development efforts of this enterprise, and for the govern-
ment to proceed quickly to make a final determination whether the
U.S. Government or the private sector will launch its own Middle
East satellite or cable broadcasting initiative, a decision that can-
not afford to be postponed much longer.
Mr. Chairman, during my tour of duty in Morocco, I tried to un-
dertake several unprecedented public diplomacy initiatives, be-
cause I understood, even at the height of the Middle East peace
process, at the very moment when we began realizing that there
was hope for peace in the Middle East, we were under verbal as-
sault from overly opinionated journalists and religious demagogues.
They were aided by Islamic extremists and their underground net-
work throughout the region, and that is a fact that we still must
take into account, because that network of hatred is still there.
Unfortunately, the more effective public diplomacy will only miti-
gate this hatred. We also have to look at the policy problems that
we face in the region as well, but we surely can do a great deal
to lessen the misunderstanding and to arm our friends in the re-
gion with the tools necessary to take on our enemies more effec-
tively. Our embassy undertook a series of unprecedented public pol-
icy and diplomacy initiatives which I explained in my testimony.
The velocity and frequency of unanswered attacks against Amer-
ica from mosques to media have taken their toll, undoubtedly, as
you know, on our image, yet our public diplomacy programs in the
Middle East and our embassy resources allocated to public diplo-
macy are simply not up to the challenge. Mr. Chairman, whatever
we do here in Washington, whether it is with radio as well as with
Under Secretary Beers office, we have got to understand that it is
our diplomats and our people in the field who are on the front line
in this ground war, and it is they who must be trained and
equipped to redress the public diplomacy imbalance, and it is they
who must be supported by battle-tested and highly mobile and mo-
bilized public diplomacy apparatus.
The President can offer some of the leadership that is essential
to ensure that public diplomacy is accorded its proper role in the
41
formulation of foreign policy, that the two have to go hand-in-hand.

Public diplomacy has got to be, Mr. Chairman, in the take-offs and
not just on the crash-landings. In this regard, there must be better
public diplomacy coordination between Washington and its dip-
lomats stationed abroad.
There exists a short-circuit, Mr. Chairman, in the illogical wiring
diagram between the short-staffed Under Secretary of Public Diplo-
macy and her ability to direct U.S.-funded public diplomacy pro-
grams and to charge and to assess what is going on in the field.
Bureau public affairs officers since the reorganization have no au-
thority to task officers in the field and, in turn, officers in the field
are largely being ignored.
Let me add, Mr. Chairman, that the components of an effective
public diplomacy campaign must involve all the assets of the U.S.
Government to muster and to persuade. We have a better story to
tell than we realize. It involves not only policy communications, but
reminding our audiences that we have done a great deal to help
their countries in the region. Far too few Arabs understand the
work of our Peace Corps or our foreign assistance programs, or the
magnitude of American private generosity.
Second, our diplomats, starting with our Chief of Missions, have
to reengineer our embassies, Mr. Chairman, and I recommended
this in our Council on Foreign Relations report. I outlined a new
mission program plan that would help or reengineer our embassies
to deal more effectively with public diplomacy programs.
The Internet eras 247 news cycle will require an end to the 9-
to-5 syndrome prevalent in our embassies, and our Diplomatic
Corps must be motivated to reverse long-held beliefs about how
they are to work and act with host country governments and opin-
ion leaders.
This, Mr. Chairman, is not what diplomats have been trained to
do. They are not trained to confront. They are not trained to en-
gage in dialog with peoples and groups that are not necessarily
part of the mainstream of diplomatic activity at the top echelons
of society. They are not rewarded for making waves. They are not
trained how to use media technologies and to experiment with new
ideas, and many do not believe they can afford to be part of some
political campaign centered on ideas, and as part of the Council on
Foreign Relations Task Force I am sure that you will see that some
of these issues have been addressed.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, our budget for public diplomacy is inad-
equate, and our apparatus for training our diplomats has got to be
improved. Most officers, as I said, have never received media train-
ing, and hesitate to appear on local radio and television shows,
mostly because of deficiencies in foreign languages, and because of
their inadequate training.
Throughout the Middle East, U.S. cultural centers have been
closed, consulates have been ordered shut, there is no representa-
tion for public diplomacy, and if we have no fixed assets on the
ground, Mr. Chairman, on the front line in this effort, how, may
I ask, are we going to accomplish our objectives?
Mr. Chairman, as a private citizen, in closing I want to assure
you that the private sector can lend a better hand to help train our
diplomats. The range of support that can be mustered from public
42
affairs, public relations, communications, and media and adver-

tising industries is staggering, and I look forward to working with
the committee and with Under Secretary Beers and with Norm and
the others to bring these resources to bear to make this a truly ef-
fective effort in the war on terrorism.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Ginsberg follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARC CHARLES GINSBERG, FORMER AMBASSADOR TO
MOROCCO
Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me to testify regarding the status of U.S.
public diplomacy and its role in the War on Terrorism, particularly as it relates to
our challenges in the Middle East. I want to commend you and the Committee for
examining the new challenges facing U.S. public diplomacy programsmindful that
our public diplomacy strategy and the level of commitment to its success by the U.S.
Government represent crucial weapons in our War on Terrorism.
Following September 11th, I volunteered to undertake several initiatives to help
both the U.S. Government and the private sector focus additional effort and re-
sources to recalibrate and improve our public diplomacy initiatives in the Middle
East. I was raised in the Middle East and have worked extensively in the region.
I have had the privilege of serving as U.S. Ambassador to Morocco and continue to
address audiences throughout the Arab world as a former diplomat and as a busi-
nessman during frequent appearances on Al Jazeera, CNN International and Fox
News Channel. I am deeply committed to the economic and social development of
the Middle East as a strategic objective of U.S. foreign policy. And I am confident,
even in the face of the propaganda onslaught against the U.S. throughout the Mid-
dle East, that we can turn the tide in the war of ideas, however challenging that
may seem to us right now. But to rebuild our power to persuade and to win that
important front in the War on Terrorism, the United States must first understand
why the Middle East sees us so differently than how we see ourselves and deter-
mine resources must be mobilized to turn the tide of anti-Americanism against us.
We can begin by opening up lines of communication that have until now been off
limits and out of bounds by our diplomats.
In an article I authored in the Washington Post dated October 23, 2001, I pro-
posed the creation of a new public/private sector U.S. Middle East Policy Engage-
ment Commission to promote two-way dialogue and to bring together under one roof
the nations leading Middle East experts to serve as a resource for our public diplo-
macy in the Middle East. This initiative led to the formation of an ad hoc group
of Middle East experts I helped convene with my co-chair Prof. Shibley Telhami, in
December 2001, under the auspices of Search for Common Ground and the Woodrow
Wilson Center for Strategic International Studies. We came together to explore how
the private sector could support Americas public diplomacy initiatives in the region
and to assess what needed to be done to better engage the private sector in this
effort.
A Steering Committee of this ad hoc group has been meeting throughout the
Spring to develop several short term public diplomacy initiatives including: 1) a
media exchange program; 2) the development of a dialogue website; and 3) a plan
to enlist the support of entertainers respected and admired in the Arab world to
participate in public diplomacy outreach. We hope to meet shortly with Under Sec-
retary of State Charlotte Beers to share with her our recommendations and to offer
our expertise to help our Government achieve its objectives in the war of ideas now
being waged in the Middle East.
I also serve on the Council on Foreign Relations Public Diplomacy Task Force
under the Chairmanship of Peter Peterson. This Task Force, which includes over
60 experts, has devoted months of time and effort to develop a comprehensive blue-
print for improving U.S. public diplomacyindeed to revolutionize our public diplo-
macy functions. The quality of the effort and the scope of the Councils Report will
surely warrant the attention of this Committee, Congress and the Executive Branch
as it considers reforms to Americas public diplomacy functions and budget. The Re-
port will unveil many important recommendations for reorganizing the public diplo-
macy functions within the U.S. Government under a new Presidential Directive. It
is clear to those like myself who have worked in the State Department, the White
House and at embassies abroad that there is urgent need to fix a system that is
simply not working well enough to meet the challenges of a new war.
43
Despite the integration of USIA into the Department of State, public diplomacy
and policy formulation are almost two ships passing in the night. The Councils Re-
port directly addresses this challenge and explores new ways to improve the coordi-
nation of foreign policy formulation and public diplomacy functions in Washington
and in our missions abroad. The Report will also propose a new way to budget pub-
lic diplomacy programs, recommend new training programs and opinion research
skills for public diplomacy professionals, and outline new programmatic initiatives
that would greatly expand exchanges. It will also recommend the creation of a new
entity to encourage universities, foundations and NGOs to make public diplomacy
a central priority.
I am confident you and the Committee will find it an extraordinarily important
contribution to your efforts to improve Americas public diplomacy programs.
I also serve on the Board of Directors of a new private sector initiative known
as Al-Haqiqa (the Truth)an effort to develop a U.S. private sector satellite tele-
vision station and program content for the Arab world, which has been launched by
one of Americas distinguished former diplomats Ambassador Richard Fairbanks, a
Special Middle East Negotiator under President Reagan. Al-Haqiqa is currently
planning as its initial objective to develop Americanstyle Arabic language news-ori-
ented programming to be broadcast on existing Arabic cable and satellite systems
in the Middle East. This effort has the bi-partisan support for a very distinguished
group of American leaders and statesmen, including former President George Bush,
James Baker, Sandy Berger, Lee Hamilton, George Shultz and Richard Allen, just
to name a few. But any American effort to compete with Al Jazeera and other Arab
media will require private sector resources and talent to develop content program-
ming. I hope Congress will encourage the media program development efforts of Al-
Haqiqa pending a final determination whether the U.S. Government itself intends
to launch its own Middle East satellite or cable broadcasting initiativea decision
that cannot afford to be postponed much longer.
During my tour of duty in Moroccoa country which by all accounts is a truly
great friend of America, I recall that at the most favorable junction in the Middle
East Peace Process, America, its policies, and its leaders were nevertheless under
verbal assault from overly opinionated journalists and religious haters, cynics and
doubters. They found it spiritually and materially rewarding and politically correct
to run roughshod over the truth about America. They were aided by the Islamic ex-
tremists and their underground network next door in Algeria whose government
was waging an important struggle against Islamic extremism largely out of sight
of America. Why the anger and disillusionment seemed to surface at such a moment
of promise is subject to much debate. Certainly, our foreign policies both in the Mid-
dle East and around the world contributed to this resentmenta fact that must be
taken into account if we are to develop adequate public diplomacy initiatives in the
region. Unfortunately, more effective public diplomacy will not completely reverse
the resentment and mistrust of America that have taken root in the Middle East
without changes in our policies. But we surely can do a great deal to lessen the mis-
understanding, and arm our friends in the region with the tools necessary to take
on our enemies more effectively than we can do alone.
Indeed, under the rubric that no good deed shall go unpunished every fault fac-
ing the region is being laid at our doorstep even though we have done so much to
greatly improve the lives of ordinary citizens from Casablanca to Cairo and beyond.
Too many Islamic clerics have a favorite anti-American sermoneach one more dia-
bolical and disturbing than the one preceding it. They do not make great bedtime
reading. Too many journalists (many of whom are on the payrolls of governments
which are recipients of American taxpayer assistance) lavish derision on our motives
and our culture. We could do nothing right then and certainly that attitude has
worsened in recent months. It was clear to me then as it is so clear to me now that
something had to be done to take on this growing deluge of criticism and hatred.
Without any need for direction from Washington our embassy undertook a series
of unprecedented public diplomacy initiatives to open up lines of communication
with journalists, Islamic clerics and university faculty and studentsin other words
the opinion elites in the Middle East. These encounters were at times difficult and
emotional. I recall once when I took New York Times columnist Tom Friedman into
one of these sessions he told me afterwards that he felt he had just attended a 60s
version of an Arab League meeting. I urged my colleagues in other posts to do the
same and an informal network of ambassadorial exchanges soon commenced in
order to begin sharing information about the challenges we were facingnot an
easy task since most embassies are not on the receiving end of other embassy cable
traffic back to Washington.
The velocity and frequency of unanswered attacks against America and Americans
from mosques to media have taken their toll on our image in the region and has
44
helped fuel anger and resentment that is directly responsible for the success of Is-
lamic extremism in the Middle East. If we are to turn the tide in the War on Terror,
we ignore this cascade of hatred at our peril. Yet, our public diplomacy programs
in the Middle East and our embassy resources allocated to public diplomacy are sim-
ply not up to the challenge ahead of us.
Whatever we do in Washington to reverse the tide we must understand that our
diplomats are on the frontline in this war of words and it is they who need to be
trained and equipped to redress the public diplomacy imbalance. And it is they who
must be supported by a battle-tested and highly mobile and mobilized public diplo-
macy apparatus in the U.S. Government that is not consumed by traditional bu-
reaucratic inertia and shopworn artificial distinctions between public diplomacy and
hard-core policy formulation.
What can be done?
First, Presidential leadership is essential to ensure that public diplomacy is ac-
corded its proper role in the policy formulation and implementation processpref-
erably within the White House under the National Security Councilthat would es-
tablish a public diplomacy component as well as serve as a coordinating structure
that links all of the policy and public diplomacy components of the government. A
Presidential Determination should make clear that public diplomacy is a strategic
component of U.S. foreign policy and that it represents a crucial component of our
diplomats duties and responsibilities that can no longer be marginalized. To be ef-
fective, public diplomacy must be in on the take offs and not just the crash land-
ings and there must be a process in place to regularly assess its effectiveness and
to shift priorities and resources as needed.
In this regard, there must be better public diplomacy coordination between Wash-
ington and its diplomats stationed abroad. For example, it is clear that there exists
a shortcircuit in the illogical wiring diagram between the short-staffed Under Sec-
retary of Public Diplomacy and its ability to direct U.S. funded public diplomacy
programs and the public affairs officers operating in our posts abroad. Bureau pub-
lic affairs officers have no authority to task public affairs officers in the field. In
turn, officers in the field are being ignored because their reporting is not integrated
into a process that can swiftly act on the advice they are sending in from the field.
In fact, they do not even report to the Under Secretary of Public Affairs, but to the
regional assistant secretaries. It makes absolutely no sense to see public diplomacy
on the periphery of policy developmentalmost as an afterthought to those who
think that mainstream policy formulation can somehow be undertaken without a
plan to ensure its receptivity.
I had hoped that the integration of USIA into the Department of State would her-
ald a closer relationship between public diplomacy and the development and execu-
tion of foreign policy. I am afraid that this has not been the case. We are going to
have to redefine the role of U.S. public diplomacy such that it is an integral part
of policy formulation from its very inception and launchrather than an after-
thought relegated to non-mainstream diplomats.
Mr. Chairman, let me add that the components of an effective public diplomacy
campaign should involve all assets that the U.S. Government can muster to per-
suade and influence. We do have a great story to tell. It involves not only policy
and communications, but reminding our targeted audiences of the efforts Americans
have made to help their countries. Far too few Arabs know of the wonderful work
of our Peace Corps operating in their countries. Far too few know how much foreign
assistance has been given to help their nations. Far too few appreciate the mag-
nitude of American private generosity through non-governmental organizations and
charities that operate in their countries.
Second, U.S. diplomats, starting with Chiefs of Mission and the Deputy Chiefs of
Mission must be mandated through each embassys Mission Program Plan or
MPP and promotion precepts to integrate public diplomacy functions into each
MPP. The Internet eras 24/7 news cycle will require an end to the 9-5 syndrome
prevalent at our embassies so that we can better and more rapidly respond to the
media attacks on us. Until September 11, public diplomacy duties had been largely
relegated to press attaches who are not fully integrated into the embassys political
operations. Our diplomatic corps must be motivated to reverse long held beliefs
about how they are to work and act with host country governments and opinion
leaders and penalized if they resist. They will have to be better sensitized to the
fact that no matter how justified a particular foreign policy may be to us, without
an effective complimentary public diplomacy program all of that hard policy work
may ultimately fail.
This is not what diplomats are trained to do. They are not trained to confront and
to open dialogue with peoples and groups that are not necessarily part of the main-
stream of diplomatic activity or at the top echelons of society. They are not re-
45
warded for making waves with host governments or detractors. They are not trained
how to use media technologies or to experiment with new ideas. They do not believe
they can afford to be part of a political campaign centered on ideas. Yet, opening
up channels of communication with our detractors is more important than ever be-
fore.
As part of my work for the Council on Foreign Relations Public Diplomacy Task
Force I drafted a model Mission Program Plan for Public Diplomacy and I am hope-
ful that it will be integrated into the Councils Report. This draft model would re-
quire each Ambassador to establish a mission Public Diplomacy Task Force, chaired
by either the Ambassador or his Deputy Chief of Mission, which would be respon-
sible for and coordinate all agency public diplomacy initiatives and spell out man-
dated public diplomacy functions for each embassys officer, including officers from
other agencies. The MPP would also compel each embassy to provide the Depart-
ment and the White House feedback and analysis on the effectiveness of public di-
plomacy programs. Additional budget resources will need to be increased to meet
program objectives including funding for new media streaming fees to local media
outlets, new website improvements and exchange and outreach initiatives. This will
require Ambassadors to:
Complete an assessment of what key policy and message elements need to be
promoted to different audiences in a host country.
Assess how best to mobilize Post resources to accomplish key public diplomacy
objectives.
Determine ways to measure the impact and capacity of his or her team to re-
calibrate public diplomacy initiatives.
Identify, by priority order, key public opinion targets and determine whether
Department or private sector resources are needed to reach these targets.
Determine how the embassy can best help the White House facilitate public di-
plomacy considerations into policies that affect policy to the host country.
Third, our budget for public diplomacy is inadequate and our apparatus for train-
ing our diplomats in public diplomacy is virtually non-existent. Other than Public
Affairs Officers, most officers have never received media training and often hesitate
to appear on local radio and television shows, mostly because of local language defi-
ciencies and inadequate training. Throughout the Middle East, U.S. cultural and
cultural centers have been closed. Consulates have been ordered shut. There is no
representation budget for public diplomacy. If we have fixed assets on the front line
in this effort how, may I ask, are we going to accomplish our objectives?
Our private sector can lend a hand to help better train our diplomats at the newly
named George Schultz Foreign Affairs Training Center. The range of support that
could be mustered from the public affairs, public relations, communications, media
and advertising industries is staggering and it has indeed been offered if we can
help the U.S. Government accept these offers from the private sector. In this regard
junior, mid-level and senior officers should be required to fulfill fundamental public
diplomacy training as part of their promotion requirements and the private sector
can help train our officers. That training could include a variety of disciplines such
as public speaking; media and opinion analysis, how to use media for message deliv-
ery and how to integrate public diplomacy into policy functions.
Mr. Chairman, in summary, I believe that the War on Terror compels us to reex-
amine, replenish, and reform our public diplomacy functions both in Washington
and in the field. I look forward to helping this Committee and the Congress in ac-
complishing this vital war objective. Thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hoffman.

STATEMENT OF DAVID HOFFMAN, PRESIDENT, INTERNEWS,
ARCATA, CA
Mr. HOFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am president of
Internews, a nonprofit organization that supports open media. I
think you will agree with me that media is one of the most impor-
tant and powerful forces for social change in the world today, and
I have been in the business for 20 years, and I have been as-
tounded that we carry on so much of our foreign policy without
paying attention to media, so I compliment the chairman for put-
ting the attention on this very important issue.
46
Clearly, 9/11 has put this in front of us. We recognize that ter-
rorism has been born in societies that have very closed media, and
we are kind of astounded to see that there is such virulent anti-
American propaganda happening on state-controlled media from
governments that are our allies. The things we have been reading
are in Tom Friedmans articles, quotes from Egyptian newspapers,
or newspapers in which the editors are appointed by President Mu-
barak, and this is happening across the board, and we have to look
at this.
We also are aware, as has been said today, that there is not an
infrastructure of local media where moderate voices can answer
some of the extremist Islamist propaganda that is coming across
state-controlled media. The good news is that the great majority of
Muslims around the world want a free media.
There is no better example for that, no better proof for that than
Iran, where 80 percent of the people have voted in a relatively free
election for a reformist President where the major issue is freedom
of the press. Now, they have not been able to get that freedom of
the press, but it is very clear that in an Islamist country like Iran
the people demand that, and will eventually get that.
The concept of local media which Senator Lugar was referring to
earlier when he was asking about indigenous local media, the con-
cept of local broadcast media is a relatively new phenomenon, even
in Western Europe. We began U.S. Government assistance for inde-
pendent broadcast media in the former Soviet Union around 10
years ago. In that time we have spent approximately $250 million,
no small amount, on it, but it has been pretty much an untold
story. It is one of the great success stories in American foreign aid.
I will speak just for my own organization, Internews.
We have supported 2,000 independent broadcasters, mostly tele-
vision, some radio. Broadcasts produced or coordinated by
Internews reach over 300 million people. Most of those stations are
on 24 hours a day. In those 10 years of broadcasting we have not
received a single complaint from a U.S. Embassy or a U.S. Govern-
ment agency that any of those stations are broadcasting anything
that is considered anti-American. We have raised the standards
I think there has been general agreement that we have raised the
journalistic standards of those independent broadcasters. It is effec-
tive, it is working, and it can work in the Muslim world as well,
as we have proven recently in Indonesia, I think.
There are the great examples, of course, such as the overthrow
of Milosevic and the role of B92. Just recently one of the stations
we have supported, Rustovi2 in Georgia, broadcast revelations of
corruption. After going through a training program on investigative
journalism they took it very seriously and investigated the corrup-
tion of government officials. When they broadcast that the Ministry
of the Interior sent militiamen to close down the station. They put
the cameras on live. Thousands of people took the streets, and
Shevardnadze was forced to dismiss his entire government.
There are many, many examplesas you will hear about Kosovo,
there are many examples where independent media has played a
critical role in the transformation of societies that were previously
under dictatorships to democracy.
47
We live in a different world. We live in a world of proliferation

of information that is coming from all sources, including from sat-
ellites and Internet. The boundaries that existed before are
breached by this new technology every day. We have to be able to
meet that.
We put a lot of attention on Al Jazeera, and it is natural that
we would think that we should compete with Al Jazeera with Ara-
bic language satellite television, but I do not believe that any
amount of foreign broadcasting is going to change the sense of pow-
erlessness and Western domination that Arabs today feel. The only
thing that is going to change the feelings that they have is to
change their societies, to help them democratize, to help them mod-
ernize, and the best way to do that is to support local media. It is
far more cost-effective.
We are spending $20 to $25 million a year, and we are reaching
300 million people every single day. I think that is a compliment
to the traditional foreign broadcasting strategies that we should
look at very carefully.
Local broadcasting is always more credible than foreign broad-
casting. Tom Friedman a couple of days ago wrote, he said that the
Bush team wants to spend money on TV or advertisements to
broadcast our message in Arabic to the Arab world. Frankly, there
is no modern, progressive message we could broadcast in Arabic
that would begin to compare and influence the one that would
come from Egypt, and I would say to one that would come from any
local country, so it is not a matter of choosing between these two.
It is a matter of seeing them as complimentary.
But in pursuing our foreign broadcasting, let me recommend, if
I can, that the greater the degree of editorial independence you can
give broadcasters the more effective they are going to be. On the
other hand, if they are fully editorially independent, then what you
are really competing with is not Al Jazeera, you are competing
with the other commercial American broadcasters that are already
out there, and so the question is raised, to what degree is there
really value added to that?
If they are not editorially independent, these foreign broadcasts
lose credibility to the extent they are seen that way, and you
should never underestimate your audience. The people we are try-
ing to reach have spent their lifetime being propagandized. They
are experts at it. They can tell a mile away what is propaganda
and what is good news.
Finally, I would like to say that in a lot of these countries the
State Department and our embassies have had a kind of benign ne-
glect about independent media, and the media regimes in these
countries. This is particularly true in Saudi Arabia, in Egypt, and
a great deal more pressure needs to come from our State Depart-
ment to demand that these countries institute media reform. It is
coming. Pakistan just completely liberalized their broadcast media
with private television and radio just a few months ago. There is
pressure from the satellite companies for all these locals to open up
their media because otherwise they are going to lose their audi-
ence, but we also need pressure from the State Department.
The President in Monterrey talked about conditionality and our
foreign aid in general. I think there should be specific benchmarks
48
that should be listed by our State Department, by the Secretary,

that would be conditions that countries would need to meet in
order to get other forms of foreign assistance.
There are moderates out there who are not getting on the air-
waves. We should support those moderate Muslim voices. They are
out there. If we build it, they will come. If we help the Muslim
world with the resources that we have given to, say, the former So-
viet Union, we will find that the attitudes of the populations there
will change very rapidly once the moderates there are empowered.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hoffman follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID HOFFMAN, PRESIDENT, INTERNEWS
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee: thank you for inviting me to testify
on the issue of independent media and public diplomacy. The Chairman should be
congratulated for consideration of US government support for independent media,
which is a relatively new phenomenon in our foreign assistance portfolio.
Since September 11th, the United States Government has given increased atten-
tion to the broad question of public diplomacy and the role of information in shaping
public opinion around the world. A clear articulation of American policies and val-
ues is central to the success of our overall foreign policy agenda. But as we seek
to shape our message to foreign audiences, we should also keep in mind the critical
role of indigenous independent media as a complement to our traditional public di-
plomacy strategies. Simply put, we need to look not only at what we say to other
countries, but how other countries disseminate information locally and how that af-
fects their views of America.
Media is the most powerful force for social and political change in the world
today. Radio, television, print, and the Internet are information vehicles through
which citizens from every country form their opinions of the world. And where these
information vehicles are used to propagate misinformation, misperceptions and erro-
neous reporting overseas, our national security is endangered.
In many countries in the Middle East, the media remain state-controlled or heav-
ily influenced by the government. In some cases the government-run media is con-
sciously used as a safety valve to deflect anger and frustration that arises from do-
mestic problems. In other cases, journalists are subjected to draconian media laws
compounded by self-censorship fueled by fear and uncertainty about the arbitrary
ways in which the laws could be applied.
Nevertheless, in several countries with predominantly young Muslim populations
like Pakistan or Indonesia, where much of the street are still susceptible to nega-
tive and hostile propaganda directed against the United States, there are new and
hopeful signs of media liberalization and privatization.
U.S. government sponsored overseas broadcasting and traditional public diplo-
macy, alone, will not reverse this growing anti-American sentiment and inflam-
matory opinion that pervades the Arab and Muslim world in particular. Although
overseas broadcasting has the advantage of being able to control the message and
is vital in closed societies that have no other access to Western news reporting, it
is not a long-term solution to the endemic repression of independent sources of local
media. Foreign broadcasts do not contribute to the building of democratic media in-
stitutions in these countries. As long as local media remains suppressed, democracy
cannot grow. Local media is the oxygen of democracy.
The State Department should therefore make it a high priority to reform media
law and policy in predominantly Muslim countries in order to open their societies
to a diversity of opinion and models of fact-based journalism. For too long we have
turned our heads and tolerated government repression of local media in many of
these countries as long as their governments continued to meet our fossil fuel needs
and support our foreign policy goals. But since September we have learned how dan-
gerous it can be to ignore the information culture of the street. The State Depart-
ment should be encouraged to make the establishment and growth of free and inde-
pendent media in countries with predominantly Muslim populations a priority for
U.S. foreign policy and assistance strategies in the region. In line with the Presi-
dents statement in Monterrey, Mexico about the conditionality of American aid tied
to improvements in human rights and democracy, the Secretary of State should es-
tablish benchmarks for acceptable standards of freedom of expression and the rights
of independent media.
49
To help countries achieve open media, we must provide legal advice and assist-
ance, journalistic training in ethics and reporting, help to media owners and man-
agers in the financing and management of independent media companies. We need
to provide funding for equipment, production and programming that will help inde-
pendent media outlets compete with state-run media. And we must provide this
training, not directly from the U.S. government, but through qualified non-profit or-
ganizations that have proven track records and credibility in the region.
This last point is a sensitive issue but extremely important. America has always
been the leader in the development of independent, nongovernmental media. Non-
governmental, commercial broadcasting is still a relatively new phenomenon in the
world, even in Western Europe. But the world is rapidly recognizing the vitality and
importance of nongovernmental electronic media. As we provide assistance to inde-
pendent media in countries transitioning to democracy, we must be especially care-
ful to respect the editorial independence of the recipients. This is the point at which
traditional public diplomacy must give pause and have faith in the play of democ-
racy and the free press, which have made our own country strong.
Providing resources and expertise to local independent media through qualified
American non-profit media organizations has successfully addressed the dilemma of
government assistance to non-governmental media. There is always some risk that
independent media companies, which are recipients of US government assistance,
will broadcast news reports that are hostile to America. But it is interesting to note
that after a decade of support to more than two thousand independent broadcasters,
Internews has received virtually no complaints from any US Embassies or govern-
ment agencies about any anti-American reports on these channels. On the contrary,
our training programs and support have been universally acclaimed to have raised
professional standards and contributed to a far greater degree of objective, fact-
based reporting from these stations.
It is an approach that has worked successfully in the past throughout the former
Soviet Union, in Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Indonesia and East Timor. When Congress,
in its wisdom, began to give modest amounts of foreign aid to independent media
in the former Soviet Union, the results were astonishing in the speed and effective-
ness with which a multiplicity of voices emerged. At least 2000 independent broad-
casters and 30,000 journalists and media professionals have benefited from U.S.
sponsored training and technical assistance programs in the former Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe. U.S.-assisted independent media played a critical role in over-
throwing the dictatorship of President Slobodan Milosivic in Yugoslavia, and re-
cently in exposing corruption in the Republic of Georgia. In Indonesia, US funds
supported the first radio program for women in a Muslim country where it quickly
became the most popular show in the country. In all these cases, US support for
indigenous local media succeeded in creating a culture of Western-style news report-
ing that goes beyond packaging Americas story.
And the results of supporting open and independent media are concrete and meas-
urable. According to the World Banks World Development Report 2002, countries
with privately owned, local, independent media outlets had less corruption, more
transparent economies, and higher indices of education and health. A free press fa-
cilitates multiparty elections, freedom of expression, transparency of both govern-
ment and business, improved human rights, and better treatment for women and
disenfranchised minorities.
None of this is to suggest that there is not a role and an important need for tradi-
tional public diplomacy, especially the cultural exchange programs, which give for-
eign nationals a first-hand experience of America, something no media program can
ever match. Overseas broadcasting can be a lifeline to people who live in totally
closed societies. U.S. governmental programs like Radio Sawa, which provides young
people with Western and Arabic news and music through the Middle East Radio
Network appear to be gaining audience and should continue.
But before spending vast sums of money on an expensive satellite television net-
work for the Islamic world in order to beam our messages directly into these soci-
eties, we should question whether it is far more cost-effective to expend resources
on developing local media. Given the limits on resources for overseas media, I would
encourage us to focus on individual countries like Egypt, Pakistan and others where
we can significantly alter the local media landscape through media assistance and
training. It is unlikely that a U.S. government produced satellite channel can out-
perform American and European commercial news and entertainment media compa-
nies, which already are competing for these audiences. Rather than devote enor-
mous resources to expensive technological satellite equipment, we should be exam-
ining media law and regulatory reform which are essential ingredients in the cre-
ation of an enabling environment, in which independent media can compete fairly
with state-run media.
50
In the end, limits on freedom of the media will hinder even the most vigorous and
sustained public diplomacy campaign. Populations lacking access to free and open
media and a plurality of news sources are susceptible to negative and hostile propa-
ganda directed against the United States. Support for terrorism is greatest in coun-
tries where the public has little access to outside information or free and inde-
pendent news media. Free and independent media will not automatically guarantee
moderation, but it does open new space for moderate voices that can combat anti-
Western propaganda.
And so it is in the national interests of the United States to support the growth
of free and open media around the world as an extension of our public diplomacy
work. In the final analysis support for free and vibrant local media are the best in-
vestment we can make in building a safe, secure and democratic world. I have no
doubt that the extension of American values of pluralism, tolerance and freedom of
expression will follow from this investment in local, independent open media.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Our last witness, who
probably is the single most appropriate witness we could have after
that, is Veton Surroi, who is one of those people we are talking
about. Are we kidding ourselves, Veton? Are we playing a game
here, or are we really able to impact positively and truthfully on
what is going on around the world, and the attitude toward us?
The floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF VETON SURROI, CHAIRMAN, KOHA MEDIA
GROUP, PRISTINA, KOSOVO
Mr. SURROI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let us just judge from
what happened 9 months ago on this date. While the United States
was being attacked, I was sitting in my office saying in despair,
what can I do, and so I wrote an editorial and I said, let us go out
to the streets tomorrow at the same time as we used to do in the
Milosevic times, and let us protest against this attack, and let us
also express some solidarity about it. Well, on September 12 at 3
p.m. you had hundreds of thousands of Kosovars in all of our cities
protesting against terrorism and expressing solidarity with Amer-
ica.
Now, of course, this happens not only because of an editorial, we
all know that. It happens because Kosovo is probably the most pro-
American place in Europe today and is obviously thankful for a
very diligent U.S. policy to which you have personally contributed
as well for many years, but it happens because in our society,
media have a role of civil society, and media can mobilize posi-
tivelythey can mobilize negatively, but certainly positively, and
they can mobilize for the right cause.
Now, how did that happen? That credibility was built over years,
because that is paper, and the other media outlets were built in
times of repression, so the media actually becamethe newspaper,
the editorial became a symbol of resistance against an oppressive
society, against Milosevic, and therefore its credibility was actually
one of participating in liberation.
This is a contribution, certainly, which could not have existed,
these conditions, without a concerted effort, a contribution from the
international community, from the United States, from the Euro-
pean donors, and from private donors, and all of this, of course,
with a clear view in having a self-sustained media after a period
of time.
Now, for me, it is rather challenging to find some parallels, not
because Kosovo is a majority Muslim background, because the
51
Kosovars are basically identified as Albanians in their majority,

and not with their religious background, but it is challenging in a
sense to find parallels between what we have gone through and
what the Muslim societies in the Arab world are going through
right now, and the question is actually first of all the extremism
of an ideology.
Milosevic misused ethnicity and brought his people to that posi-
tion, and the Taliban and al-Qaeda are misusing Islam and bring-
ing their own people and the societies surrounding them to destruc-
tion, so we are dealing with the extreme forms, or manifestations
of these totalitarian ideologies, which unfortunately have to be
fought by force. But underneath those ideologies are a vast group
of people and many regimes who are actually, to a certain extent,
by being closed are contributing to the extremism.
So what we are talking about now, today, I think, is about open-
ing of closed societies in the Muslim world. It is a more challenging
task, I think, than simply broadcasting a message here and there
about what the American position is. It is about opening those soci-
eties, opening those regimes, and it is not about opening a dictato-
rial regime. It is not about opening Iraq, because we cannot do it
at this stage with these means, but it is about opening those soci-
eties where America has a leverage, about opening those societies
that consider themselves American allies, but nevertheless do not
allow freedom of expression the way we know, and I am glad to say
we know it, we the Americans and the Kosovars do. What a day.
So it is about free reformed societies, and you ask, how do you
act in those societies? Well, our experience is the following. First
of all, you get effective dissemination of information, and certainly
what we have heard today about the radio stations, and that Radio
Sawa will help in many of these societies. Nevertheless, what is
certainly more needed, and this has been our experience with VOA
and BBC, is the more local input into these organizations, the bet-
ter, the more local stringers, the better.
The second, and I think of utmost importance, is amplification of
indigenous voices. You cannot have a successful campaign of open-
ing societies if local papers, local stations do not do that, and it is
certainly not about projecting this media and international net-
work. It is the importance of the local newspaper that can do that.
Now, the local newspaper cannot do it unless it is also being sup-
ported in terms of newsprint, or in terms of a printing press, or in
terms of setting up a distribution system. A local journalist is being
confronted with an authoritarian system, and that authoritarian
system controls airwaves, frequencies, printing presses, ways of im-
port of news print. It also controls the ways of distribution of the
newspapers. It is a rather ample fight, but once you start fighting
it, you see the satisfaction of winning, actually, that war.
There is no other way in which these independent media can be
developed in that region without direct support. It is not a question
of only supporting it politically. It is a question of supporting it also
financially. Certainly it is about, as you said, drawing up also
forms of conditionality that will protect the journalist. There are
many courageous people everywhere in every authoritarian society,
but those courageous people will amplify, there will be more of
them only if a powerful country like the United States actually
52
starts protecting, the journalist actually starts telling the closed re-
gimes, or semi-closed regimes that they cannot go on arresting
journalists.
Now, we have to be, of course, inventive in that support, and we
have to use all the technologies. You have in many countries inven-
tive people. Serbia was a good example. Radio B92 was a very
good example. The downfall of Milosevic could not have happened
in that fashion if B92, a very courageous station, had not contin-
ued, despite being closed, trying to broadcast on the Internet, try-
ing to do it on the satellite and get news out.
The fourth and, I think, critical point that is being debated as
I have seen it in parts of this society here in the United States is
whether the support to the independent media will actually create
more extremist voices in the region. Now, I think the debate is
false in the sense of, if you support the media you will simply find
many pro-American media in that region. I think you should not
expect that.
The independent media in the Balkans in our region, in our cri-
sis were sometimes critical. We are the most pro-American society
in the region. We were critical of the U.S. policy on Bosnia, on inac-
tivity on Bosnia. We were critical for what we saw were flaws in
U.S. policy, but we nevertheless considered that only an open and
critical media can also deliver on its credibility on the one hand,
and on the other hand, only a critical and open debatea critical
and open debate is possible only with friends.
The CHAIRMAN. And the virtue of being correct, I would remind
you.
Mr. SURROI. I do not think anybody should be afraid of support
of a media that will be critical of the United States. It is not a
question of whether it is critical or not critical. The real debate is
between the existing media that created conspiracy theory that this
whole thing of the United States is a Zionist, a Vatican and what-
have-you conspiracy against Islam, which we used to hear from
Milosevic all the time. That is not the point. The point is actually
to bring them to a rational debate, and see what the pros and cons
of each and every policy.
The end result actually ought to be, the ideal end result would
be a paper in Amman or in Cairo or somewhere that publishes the
pros and cons of Americas position, that gets Senator Biden to
write about this or that segment of the policy, and has an intellec-
tual debate with somebody else on the other side who will say,
well, we needthis or that problem.
And the fifth is the question of opening the debate within the so-
ciety. The media in the Arab world I think in this pre-reform state
of the Arab world will play an important role in creating a debating
space in the society. When you do not have a functioning par-
liament the way the Western world knows it, when you do not have
a public control over expenditures, when you do not have that
space to debate about all of these things, you have the media actu-
ally to create the space to be a parliamentary force, and that is
part of the deal.
The second is to create pluralism in the Arab society. Not all
Arab societies are the same. Arab covers a very wide space as we
know it.
53
The third is to create a debate between, in this case, in the Mid-

dle Eastern case, between the Arabs or the Palestinians and the
Israelis. I think that the media will not resolve the Palestinian-
Israeli conflict, but without the media to open up the debate within
the Palestinian society and within the Israeli society, and to reach
a standard by which these societies can be critical to each other
within each others society, I do not see a way that it is going to
be resolved either.
I thinkand with this I will finish, Mr. Chairman. I think the
end result of U.S. public diplomacy ought not to be the expectation
that after an effort the Arab world, or particular parts of the Arab
world will love you, but I think the immediate result that is needed
is that hate speech in that part of the world is for the first time
confronted with rational speech, and I think that ought to be the
aim.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Surroi follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF VETON SURROI, CHAIRMAN, KOHA MEDIA GROUP
Members of the Committee, Ladies and Gentlemen:
Nine months ago on this date I was sitting in my office in Prishtina, gathering
information on what was going to be known as a new way of waging war against
the United States, and indeed, war against democratic society as a whole. Being a
Kosovar, coming from a society that has gone through a very long period of violence
including a genocidal war, there was no need for detailed explanations of the shock,
the pain, and the sense of loss that we were seeing directly on TV that day of Sep-
tember 11.
Also, being a Kosovar, coming from a society that has been liberated thanks to
American leadershipan effort that for many years was waged by a bipartisan
group of Members of Congress, especially Senators Biden and Lugar of this distin-
guished Committeethe September 11 attack against the United States was clearly
understood as an attack against Kosova as well. On that day, I could not do much
more than write an editorial, explaining to my fellow Kosovars why all of us should
be out on the streets of our cities, the way we protested before against the Milosevic
regime, now expressing our full solidarity with the American people and our con-
demnation of terrorism. On September 12th, hundreds of thousands of people all
over Kosova were out on the streets with a simple message: America we are with
you.
As chairman of an independent media group, comprised of a leading television
station and the biggest newspaper in Kosova, I have experienced the power of the
freely expressed word. So to me it was not surprising at all to see this gathering
of the people of Kosova, assembled by their own will, without any governmental or
party direction, on September 12th.
Civil society, with the independent media at its heart, played a crucial role in re-
sistance against the Milosevic regime over the past decade. First the weekly KOHA,
and then the daily newspaper KOHA Ditore, emerged as critical voices during the
long years of oppression. These and other indigenous media voices, independent
from the political parties, bridged the gap between the dark reality of those years
and the democracy our people are now building. This vital role of the free media,
of course, would not have been possible without the sustained political and material
support of the United States, as well as European and private donor organizations,
among which the most prominent was the Soros foundation. That support was not,
and was not intended to be, endless: KOHA developed a policy of self-sustainability
and was the first newspaper in the region to achieve that status only three months
after the war. I believe that our independence and standards will allow us to play
an important role in democracy and state-building in Kosova for decades to come.
In transitional countries, there is continuous conflict between the forces that want
to expand the freedom of the individual and society, and the forces that want to
deny that freedom. And this conflict is not only about authoritarian rule vs. democ-
racy, as was the clear-cut case of Milosevic vs. all of us. This struggle also continues
in many post-authoritarian societies that are trying to build democracy, where the
authorities undermine the economic foundations of independent media so that offi-
cial policies and messages can go unexamined and uncriticized.
54
In my homeland, we have gone through all phases of repression, terror, and con-
flict. Journalists and media were prime targets for the Milosevic regime, as they al-
ways are for such regimes around the world. But no matter what the cost, our jour-
nalists remained close to the center of Kosovas story. And we learned some lessons
from this ordeal:
There is no alternative to indigenous, independent journalism. A message from
international broadcasters, however good it is, and even when delivered in the
local language, still lacks full credibility within the society. A message from
journalists within the society has much more credibility and respect.
Set professional standards of journalism. Bad policies in a country also derive
from bad journalism. Bad journalism is the best ally of the authoritarian mind
set.
Persevere in your work and get international support. Authoritarian rulers in
this interconnected new world can still get away with imprisoning many people,
but they think twice about imprisoning a journalist.
If you persevere, you might get support, but if you dont get support it will be
much harder to persevere. The more pressure the regime puts on you, the more
international and indigenous support you will need.
As you struggle to open up a closed society, be professionally critical not only
towards the repressive regime, but also towards your own society. Credibility
is raised not only through your critical attitude towards a natural foe (as in
the Milosevic case) but also by a fair and critical attitude towards your collec-
tive self.
An independent media needs to be independent in terms of infrastructure as
well. Authoritarian regimes control independent media not only through open
repression, but through the control of printing presses, availability of newsprint,
radio and TV frequencies, broadcasting equipment, financial and legal repres-
sion, and other means.
In the post-conflict period, after liberation by NATO forces, we also learned impor-
tant lessons:
An independent media is crucial to building democratic institutions where there
were none. An independent media is a precursor and precondition for those
democratic institutions.
The absence of authoritarian rule does not automatically bring freedom of the
media. In the Kosovar case, a combination of weak democratic institutions and
bad international policies have brought major new threats to the independent
media. This is clearly evident in the case of Bosnia and Kosova, where the
international administrations overwhelming support for a public broadcasting
monopoly risks re-creating the state television dominance of the past, instead
of creating the level playing field needed to assure the pluralism of healthy pri-
vate and public broadcasting.
I do think that some lessons we learned in Kosova can be applied in the Middle
East, Central and South Asia. However, my recommendations for U.S. media policy
in the Muslim world are based not so much on Kosovas having a majority popu-
lation with a Muslim religious background. Kosovar society is identified more by
ethnicity than by religion. Our experience of transition from communism to democ-
racy, and from oppression to statehood, is actually more relevant. We know how to
operate within a repressive system and what kind of support is needed.
It is political Islam that has the clearest parallel to the adversary the the United
States did so much to defeat in the Balkans. The Taliban/Al Qaeda, from my per-
spective, are no different than the Milosevic ideology. Milosevic used ethnicity to
create a fascist movement the same way the Taliban used religion to create its own
version of totalitarian rule. In the end, ethnic chauvinism and religious fundamen-
talism create the same result: destruction of their own society and surrounding soci-
eties. The extreme manifestations of these ideologies, as we have seen both in the
case of Milosevic and the Taliban, are to be fought by force. And just as major U.S.
and international support has been essential for the substantial effort to transform
Balkan societiesbefore and after departure of authoritarian regimesthe same is
true in those parts of the Muslim world where political Islam prevails or is a threat.
SOME SPECIFIC STEPS ARE NEEDED FOR THIS LONG-TERM STRUGGLE:
One: More effective dissemination of information. We who have lived in closed soci-
eties know the value of a radio transistor that receives VOA or BBC broadcasts in
our mother tongue. And these broadcasts ought to be done as a concerted effort.
Nevertheless, this is also the age of satellite dishes and the Internet: there is more
55
space and more competition for information. A transistor receiving an external
broadcaster in Arabic is insufficient. The key is the indigenous talent that reports
from the region and helps bring professional standards back home, providing unbi-
ased information from within the society.
Two: Amplify indigenous voices. External broadcasting services and international
commercial newscasts are not sufficient. The people of closed societies also need to
get verification of those messages and information from indigenous media. The con-
tent of the message is important, but so is the form of it: once there are inde-
pendent, indigenous journalists it is a sign of contradiction not only of the messages
of authoritarian rule but of the very nature of that rule. Authoritarian rule is based
on an image of invincibility. Independent media can contradict that. In every closed
society there is a group of journalists who question that society. The key is to iden-
tify and support them with whatever can help amplify their voices.
Three: Direct support for independent media. The indigenous independent media
are confronted with an official system, and that system has structures of print
media, distribution of press, allocation of frequencies, transmission systems, etc. Es-
tablishing independent media means establishing competing systems. Wherever pos-
sible, this means establishing independent printing presses, Internet-based or ter-
restrial transmitters, alternative distribution organizations for media products. It
also means competing with the authoritarian regime in terms of technology and in-
formation systems. In Kosova, the independent media could not have survived had
there not been an independent printing press, alternative distribution of the news-
papers, and independent Internet capacity. Similarly, the independent media in Ser-
bia, which were crucial to the defeat of Milosevic, could not have done their job had
there not been alternative ways of broadcasting Radio B92, for example, via the
internet and satellite.
Four: Independent media and pluralism. Independent media voices by definition
will be critical voices. But the concern that opening up the media in the Muslim
world, and international support for this effort, will fuel anti-American criticism ig-
nores the longterm and even medium-term strategic benefits. The independent jour-
nalism that could be supported today in the Muslim world may be critical of Amer-
ican policy in the Middle East. However, state-controlled media in many of these
countries are already full of harsh criticism of U.S. policies. Independent media will
be critical of everything around them, including the lack of reform and transparency
at home. What the Muslim world certainly needs is a healthy debateboth within
and between its different societiesand part of that debate will be about American
policy. Nevertheless, it will be in a context in which those societies will analyze
themselves, a vital function which has been mostly lacking until now.
The Balkans may serve as an example. We in Kosova, however pro-American,
have had criticisms of some American policies now and then, especially in the initial
stages of the Bosnian war. But the independent media helped build the culture of
free expression into our society, creating the foundation for a healthy democracy.
The independent media in Serbia criticized U.S. policies in the Balkans even more,
but these media were a key part of the effort that pushed Milosevic out, and are
now helping push reform forward in Serbia.
The choice in the Muslim world is between the present dominant media which are
by definition anti-American (pushing a prejudiced message of a great Zionist-Amer-
ican-Vatican conspiracy against the Muslims, quite similar to the propaganda mes-
sage of the Milosevic era), or the at barely existing independent media which if sup-
ported will bring badly-needed pluralism on all issues. In the long run, American
foreign policy will be more successful if it can be debated with pro-and-con articles
in the editorial pages of competing newspapers and local broadcasters in Cairo, Da-
mascus or Teheran, rather than only through Death to America slogans being
chanted in the streets of those cities. If Muslim societies cannot benefit from the
growth of independent media (which has begun in Afghanistan since its liberation
from the Taliban), then they are uniquely different from all other societies we know.
Five: Independent media and pragmatism. There is also a crucial need for the
media to be bridges within a conflict, and bridges in the post-conflict period. If one
looks only at the Palestinian problem, there is a need for both the Israelis and their
neighbors to understand each others societies through a similar professional level
of journalism. Throughout the conflict in ex-Yugoslavia, independent media on dif-
ferent sides of the conflict have kept continuous communication. And now in the
post-conflict period, they are the first ones in a position to build bridges of commu-
nication between our different societies which must co-exist and define long-term
common interests. Independent media by nature are much more flexible and prag-
matic than the state- and mullah-controlled media that now dominate in so much
of the Muslim world.
56
Most of the Muslim societies today are in a pre-reform state. The U.S. and its coa-
lition of European and private media donors have succeeded, in Europe and else-
where, in opening up many closed societies. Some of these techniques cannot be
automatically applied, but much in the experience can be adapted to new conditions.
The important thing, I believe, is to make a political decision not to leave these soci-
eties to transform themselves alone. For many of us who have lived and still live
in transition societies, any success would have been impossible without a concerted,
sustained international support effort.
Since Americas first years of democracy, when Jefferson said he would rather
have newspapers without a government than a government without newspapers,
transition societies around the world have depended on free media. The United
States should lead the way in recognizing that the same facts of life are true for
the Muslim world as well. When the U.S. came to this conclusion about the Balkans,
it was a key component in assuring the freedom and peace that my homeland enjoys
today. I hope and I expect that a similar decision by America toward the Muslim
world will help open up the societies from which terror now targets your homeland.
And opening up those societies to their own voices will help bring the more normal,
productive and stable lives that their citizens want most of all. Opening up more
Muslim societies to their own mainstream forces can only be good for the common
security, as it has been for so many years of American leadership in so many places.
Thank you for the honor of addressing the Committee.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Veton. Speaking for myself, I think

it is very important that we have realistic expectations. I have been
a Senator for along time, and the one thing I have always tried not
to do, not because I like to think myself honest, but for very prac-
tical political reasons, is never over-promise.
For the last 30 years as the architect of most of the criminal jus-
tice policy on the Democratic side of the equation at least, I do not
talk about wars on drugs because there is always going to be the
problem of drugs out there, and to offer the notion that you are
going to eradicate all drug abuse is not realistic. To fundamentally
alter it is possible.
In this area what I do not want to do is be part of advertising
to the American public if they just increase expenditures what is
going to happen is we are going to be embraced by the Muslim
world as their savior, as the nation they love. Americans, I try to
explain to Europeansand we had this discussion in your office,
Veton, and I think my son, when he was stationed in Pristina, got
to meet with you as wellis that most Americans, we think our-
selvesthe average American is a decent, honorable person. They
truly are confused as to why people do not like us. They do not un-
derstand why Biden says send troops to Bosnia and Kosovo, and
why Biden says send troops to Afghanistan, and they acquiesce in
doing that, send their sons and daughters, and people do not like
us for doing that.
They do not understand why, when my motivation, Veton, and
you know it better than anyone, back in the early nineties, when
I started the drum beat to get involved in the Balkans, was be-
cause of the genocidal activities against Muslims, yet no one in the
Arab world understands that, that we went to Bosnia, we went to
Kosovo, those who were there in the very beginning, because Mus-
lims primarily were being destroyed, not justnot merelyit was
a lot of people, but it was the death camps in Bosnia. They were
about Muslims. The rape camps were about Muslims. They were
Bosniaks, but they were Muslims because of their religion, and no-
body knows that. Nobody knows that, or at least if they know it,
it has not gotten through.
57
You mentioned the Middle East, all three of you. I have had a
number of discussions, not all fruitful, not any fruitful, probably,
alone with Mr. Arafat in his compound in the West Bank and here,
and when I asked him why Taba was not a possibility he said, well,
we have not prepared our public sufficiently. There was no effort
to prepare the public, none, zero, none. None at all, and that is why
I have been somewhat critical of our Saudi friends and our Egyp-
tian friends, that if they want to be treated like mature nations,
they have to act like mature leaders.
You cannot on the one hand run editorials in the state-controlled
papers saying that the pastries that are going to be prepared for
a religious holiday in Judaism have to be made from the blood of
non-Jews as an essential ingredient and run that as news in a
state-controlled paper and expect me to believe you have any inter-
est in being a positive force in the region, so all of what each of
you have said makes a great deal of sense.
I have a couple of very specific questions, and again, back to
where I began with this. Veton, your, I think, very practical expec-
tation that we should be offering to the American people here
about if our efforts succeed, what impact they will have, what is
the measure of success here, because we will be measured. As you
know, Mr. Ambassador, we will be measured a year and two and
three from now as, what has happened, what is happening.
Now, the issue of independence for indigenous independent press
and U.S. aid, how do you thread that needle? How do you thread
the needle where we, quote-unquote, the American taxpayers, pay
for a printing press, pay for supplies, pay for salaries, even of staff,
because those are the kinds of thingsit is not merely saying, as
you said that one time, you cannot just say it is enough to tell gov-
ernments that are our friends that there is conditionality here, but
there is also the need to literally have the money to buy the ink,
figuratively speakingit is not ink any moreto buy the paper, to
have a studio, to have a roof. How do you square that circle? Yes,
Mr. Hoffman.
Mr. HOFFMAN. This is one of the key issues that you point your
finger at, the key paradox. We are trying to teach people about the
benefits of nongovernmental independent media, and we are doing
it with governmental money, so we are confronted by this question
all the time. I think that there are mechanisms that could be put
in place that could increase the sense of independence that we have
on the ground, but so far I must say I do have to say parentheti-
cally USAID has done a really good job in keeping its hands off and
not interfering editorially, and so that practice certainly helps, but
it is something we have to overcome all the time.
Our strategy in dealing with this has been to support the devel-
opment of local NGOs. In every country where we work there is a
local Internews or a local media NGO that we support.
The CHAIRMAN. Now, let me make sure, because I do not think
most people listening to this will understand what a local NGO
press person is. In other words, people think of NGOs as Catholic
charities, Irish relief workers, whatever. NGOs are nongovern-
mental organizations. Now, are there NGOs that are also news-
papers, or are also radio stations? What do you mean?
58
Mr. HOFFMAN. What I mean is, there are media assistance

NGOs, so in Russia there isInternews Russia is an all-Russian
organization of 100 people, with lawyers and producers and what-
not that basically support the hundreds of local broadcasters that
are commercial operations.
The CHAIRMAN. Very important. I just wanted for the record to
make sure what we are talking about. We are talking about, these
NGOs are to the media what the NGOs that are teaching people
how to set up accounting systems in corporations that never ex-
isted in the former Soviet Union are. I mean, they provide an ex-
pertise. They provide the legal framework. They provide other
means by which they assist private organizations.
Mr. HOFFMAN. There are really two key points I would like to
make. One is a need to support those local NGOs, but also for the
U.S. Government to give all its assistance through international
NGOs or American NGOs. There was an attempt back in 1989 or
1990 to create the international media fund, you may remember,
after Secretary Baker called for it in his Charles University speech,
and frankly that did not work, because it was seen as too closely
tied to the U.S. Government, whereas other efforts of the U.S.
State Department and USAID working through American and
international NGOs to give that assistance works much better.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Ambassador, you know the Arab world quite
well. You are one of the most qualified people we have ever had
in place when you were Ambassador. Before he became the guy
who runs this operation, the staff director of the Foreign Relations
Committee, Tony Blinken wrote an article in which he said, now
the United States has global interests and no ideological rival
whose vices remind the world of its virtues, meaning our virtues.
In other words, in the past, and Veton kind of alluded to this,
when Milosevic was around, you had opposition newspapers, under-
ground newspapers. Part of their very legitimacy was, they were
stacked up against this very bad guy out there. We were able to,
I would argue, one of the reasons why Radio Free Europe and
Radio Liberty were such an incredible success, there was a known
ideology called communism pursued and pushed by a totalitarian
government in Moscow that everything that we said or did was
measured against.
Now, we do not have an ideology that we are confronting around
the world. There is all other ideologies as it relates to the way the
marketplace works. The way the world economies function have ba-
sically been concluded to be more or less bankrupt, although there
is great doubt about this fear of unfettered capitalism and free
markets, but there is no ideology to replace that yet. I mean, no
ideology to replace it. We have a different dilemma now. How much
of our problem in having, if you will, the truth filter through the
societies, both the good and bad about us, how much of the dif-
ficulty of that truth filtering through relates to not having a coun-
terpoint against whom we are measured?
When you are sitting in Baghdad or you are sitting in Cairo, or
you are sitting in Amman, or you are sitting in Indonesia, or var-
ious places in Indonesia, and the debate is between these two su-
perpowers, the American choice does not seem to be as pernicious
or as dangerous or as counterintuitive to accept, even in the Mus-
59
lim world, I would argue. Now that is gone. What is this new thing
we have toand I am not being very articulate.
Ambassador GINSBERG. Mr. Chairman, the dilemma we face
since the end of the cold war in the Middle East is that the very
underground press that should be most interested, at least in our
judgment, of promoting democracy and freedom and ideals is actu-
ally the Islamic extremist express. It is the sermons that are being
put on cassettes that are attacking the local governments. It is the
underground newspapers. Indeed, most Arabs in the region under-
stand the difference between reading a newspaper that is con-
trolled by the government and a newspaper that they know is
being put together by forces of that are opposed to the government.
My thesis in this is that we Americans do not realize at times
that we are caught up in a civil war in the Middle East, that what
we face between those governments that use incitement as a way
of deflecting attention from their shortcomings, and the more ex-
tremist elements that are battling those very governments, is the
sense that we somehow have stumbled in between the two and are
being used by both as a way of deflecting the war that was already
taking place on the ground between them, and all of a sudden we
became the target.
Mr. Chairman, as you know, in Egypt, the war that ultimately
led to the creation of al-Qaeda and its operational arms was being
waged by extremists against the government for years, where hun-
dreds of thousands of civilians were harmed and injured. The war
in Algeria killed hundreds of thousands of Algerians in the name
of Islamic extremism.
What these countries are facing is that their populations are dis-
satisfied with their leadership and blame us for in effect appearing
to protect them and doing very little to change them, and if I can
go down into the ground, and to say to myself, what do we do with
the newspaper reporters who put the venom out and who keep
writing the most incredible vitriol against the United States, this
is all due, in fact, to the belief that we Americans fail to appreciate
and understand their unhappiness and their concerns and their
lack of hope and the despair on the ground about what we have
failed to stand for.
Mr. Chairman, this is not something that just happened over-
night. On the other hand, as I said, at the height of the peace proc-
ess, when we had the great hope and expectations that we were on
the verge of a breakthrough when Prime Minister Rabin was alive,
that hatred was still very much part and parcel of the region. The
attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 by the forerunner of al-
Qaeda was essentially trying to cutoff the umbilical cord between
us and Egypt, and we have got to understand that that is what we
are facing in order to deal more effectively with the challenge be-
fore us. I am not sure if that gets to your question.
The CHAIRMAN. No, it does get to it. Veton, and then I apologize,
I am going to have to end this. I have taken you 2 hours beyond
what I told you you would get, and I am supposed to be, an hour
ago at a Democratic Caucus, but anyway, please.
Mr. SURROI. Combining both of your questions, I think an impor-
tant element is actually to establish a coalition. It is important in
terms of, to your previous question of how do you support. I think
60
what we have seen in the Balkans from 1995 onwards was that the
form of support in which the U.S., the E.U., and the private insti-
tutions helped develop is the best way to deal with this, and there
are many very good people who have worked in direct assistance
who have experience in dealing with this issue.
Second, it is important to develop this coalition also, because the
other missing power, as you have said, is being developed, and the
missing ideology is being developed, which is political Islam, and
political Islam is actually trying to be the substitute for reform and
for opposition in closed societies, and that is a real danger, because
political Islam is basing itself on ethnicity in the Palestinian case,
it is basing itself on poverty all over the Arab world, and on oppres-
sion.
In many of these societies we still have a feudal mentality, and
that is why the coalition-building actually is important and espe-
cially the coalition-building that will try to undermine these three
areas which the political Islam is basing itself on.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, we have a good deal of work to do, to state
the obvious, but I really think for the first time in the last 5
yearsand let me end by telling you a question I was asked be-
tween the time I voted and walked back here by a very competent
foreign policy reporter. He asked me, what did I think about the
prospects for foreign aid genuinely increasing in the United States
on the part of the U.S. Government, and I use this hearing as an
example.
I think, to use a phrase that was new when I started in public
life during the struggle for women in the womens movement was,
sensitivity sessions they used to talk about, how do you sensitize
the public to the plight of women in the sixties. That was a phrase
that was very much in vogue.
I think there has kind of been a national sensitivity session that
is sort of taking place here, and the realization on the part of the
average American, to use ahe has been quoted several times
todaya Tom Friedman phrase that maybe he did not originate,
I do not know, but it is one I associate with him, which was, if you
do not visit the bad neighborhood, the bad neighborhood will visit
you.
I think there is a growing awareness on the part of the average
American that we have to rethink how we make our case in a more
complicated world so that all of the natural tendencies of human
nature are that you, as I tell people, when you go home and your
dad has just been laid off because his plant has closed down, and
the next-door-neighbor drives in at the same time with a new
Lexus, you do not sit at your dinner table saying, isnt it wonderful
our neighbor has got a new Lexus. Isnt that a wonderful thing?
If your neighbor is smart, the neighbor will put the new Lexus
in the garage once they have learned that their friend next door
has lost his job. Nations are not able to be that sensitive, I do not
suspect, but there is this notion out there on the part of the Amer-
ican public that a lot of this has to do with how we communicate.
They would not call it public diplomacy. They would say, how do
we tell our side of the story? How do we get involved?
And foreign aid is going to have easier sledding here now, be-
cause the American public understands you cannot have 3 to 5 bil-
61
lion people living on $2 a day in the world and not have a problem
eventually. People are pretty smart. Just like the people in
Amman, or excuse me, in Riyadh know the difference between the
state-owned press and press they get that is not state-owned, peo-
ple here understand these basic fundamental things as well,
So I really do think, with your help, and I am not being solic-
itous, with your help and the help of others that testified today and
some that have not, that we really can begin to build something
that is solid and substantial that will not only benefit the United
States but benefitand I think this is one of thosewe always
thought during the cold war that it is a zero-sum game. This is a
win-win situation, if we are smart about it, and I am going to
relyCongress is going to rely on the three of you and others to
help us figure out the formula.
But I do thinkmaybe I am, you know, being an optimist is an
occupational requirement. Maybe I am being a little too optimistic,
but I do think we are on the cusp of some real progress in dealing
with this notion of public diplomacy and how we interact in the
world, and I look forward to working with all three of you, as oth-
ers do here, as we do that. We have the draft report. We look for-
ward to the final report from the Council, and we welcome any sug-
gestions you have as we go on.
I have a couple of questions for each of you, if you would be will-
ing, to submit them to you in writing. I do not want to make work
for you, but I do appreciate your being here.
Veton, welcome, and thank you for the hospitality and the will-
ingness to speak to me 6, 8 years ago and ever since. You were a
rational voice in a sea of chaos when I was in your office, and I
appreciate that, and I want to publicly say I admire your persona,
courage, your personal courage that you showed. Over here, a press
person takes a risk, he or she may get fired, and if they are over-
seas I might note more media people have been killed covering
these things than a lot of other people, but in your country at the
time you were speaking out the penalty for doing the wrong edi-
torial might have been getting shot, so it is a very different deal.
I admire your personal courage.
And I admire your input, all three of you. I thank you very
much. This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:10 p.m., the committee adjourned, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]
RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF HON. CHARLOTTE BEERS, UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR PUBLIC
DIPLOMACY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
SUBMITTED BY THE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE
Question. What is the Department of State doing to ensure adequate interagency
coordination on public diplomacy issues? What impact will the White House Office
of Communications apparent efforts to fulfill this function have on the Department
of State and its leadership in the field of public diplomacy?
Answer. The most important element in coordinating our messages overseas is the
coordination of communications within the Administration. At present, the White
House, the State Department, the Defense Department, and the NSC staff are work-
ing to create more formal mechanisms for interagency coordination on two levels.
A Policy Coordination Committee (PCC) on Public Diplomacy is under consideration,
which would set strategy and focus the use of resources by the several federal agen-
62
cies that conduct public diplomacy activities abroad. The White House is meanwhile
considering the establishment of an Office of Global Communications to represent
the Presidents priorities and offer the Presidents voice to our public diplomacy ef-
forts. While the precise relationship between these two levels has not yet been de-
fined, the public diplomacy practitioners at both the White House and the State De-
partment enjoy very close working relations in which States role as the lead agency
in public diplomacy is clearly recognized.
Question. What are you and your colleagues doing to realize the spirit of Presi-
dential Decision Directive 68 (issued by President Clinton)? Have any presidential
directives on public diplomacy been issued by President Bush?
Answer. The Bush Administration recognized the value of a unified message to
the rest of the world by retaining a forum for interagency coordination on public
diplomacy. After the emergency created by the terrorist attacks of September 11,
the White House Coalition Information Centers brought assertive, day-to-day lead-
ership to the task. At this time, we at the State Department are in consultation
with the White House, the National Security Council and the Defense Department
to establish more permanent structures. We want to assure a unified message and
to bring together the assets and capabilities of the foreign affairs agencies of govern-
ment to project it in the most effective manner.
Question. Do we need a national information strategy? What can we do to make
sure that our public diplomacy and international information professionals from
State, the Department of Defense, USAID, and other agencies are coordinating to
develop national, international, and regional international information plans?
Answer. Yes, a national information strategy would help the U.S. to carry out
public diplomacy more effectively in a world of cross-cutting national and
transnational issues influenced by international and national media, NGOs, corpora-
tions, international organizations, and other outside groups.
This strategy would provide direction and a unified voice for the different inter-
national communications vehicles within the U.S. government. Such a deliberate
planning exercise, parallel to the Administrations National Security Strategy,
would enable the U.S. to speak with one voice and to respond to contingencies in
a quicker, more effective fashion. White House leadership would be essential with
such a plan. Because government operational strategy cannot be run effectively by
committee, it is important to affirm the State Departments leadership role in gov-
ernment-wide public diplomacy activities.
We coordinated with our allies through the Coalition Information Centers. It was
primarily the British, but the Canadians, Germans, Spanish and others were
brought in for closer consultations as they became more heavily engaged. We do not
normally coordinate with the UN, though we do consult with them through our U.S.
Mission in New York. The most important thing is that weve developed a mecha-
nism to coordinate a task-force like operation like the CIC. We also know that even
if we arent in a situation that would require a CIC operation, the White House can
coordinate messages through a number of mechanisms with other USG agencies as
well as other countries.
Question. Former USIA Director Edward R. Murrow used to say that public diplo-
macy needed to be incorporated into U.S. policy-making at the lift off as well as the
crash landing. As you know, one of the goals of the merger of USIA into the State
Department was to make public diplomacy an even more central part of American
diplomacy in general. This is particularly important in light of the changes wrought
by the information and communications revolutions. Is the culture of the State De-
partment changing to better incorporate public diplomacy perspectives? What more
needs to be done to encourage this critical transformation in the culture of our for-
eign policy institutions?
Answer. Public diplomacy has been strengthened since the merger of the U.S. In-
formation Agency with the Department by bringing public diplomacy insights into
play sooner as foreign policy is developed, rather than after the fact. Moreover, the
Department requested an increase in our programs for FY 2003the first program
increase for public diplomacy programs in ten yearsand public diplomacy staffing
is being increased by 56 positions above attrition levels this year. An additional 28
positions are planned in the Departments Diplomatic Readiness request for 2003.
In addition, the Departments leadership has fully supported public diplomacy strat-
egies and themes to focus and augment our traditional programs.
While we continue to work within the Department to improve the effectiveness
and coordination of these programs, the Department is currently evaluating the co-
hesion and structure of the public diplomacy organizational structure.
63
Question. At present the Department of State only budgets about five million dol-
lars a year for foreign public opinion polling. Is this enough? Is enough reliable in-
formation about foreign public opinion being brought into the policymaking process?
What more can be done to address this apparent shortfall? Do we need to allocate
more money for polling and focus groups, and how can this type of market analysis
best be integrated into U.S. government public diplomacy efforts?
Answer. Polling is an essential tool in understanding the trends of public opinion
in foreign countries and regions. Since September 11, we have gained valuable infor-
mation from a variety of polling sources, including our own polling in the State De-
partment. As a result, we have, for example, ample data on attitudes about America
and Osama Bin Ladin. This data has been integrated into our overall public diplo-
macy strategies and our tactical planning and outreach in certain market segments.
We are now working to supplement our data on what people believe about the
United States and Bin Ladin with information on why and to what degree they hold
their beliefs. This will increase our ability to determine the most effective strategies
and tactics for public diplomacy. To the extent possible, we are seeking to do this
within existing resources.
Question. How can the United States make better use of the Islamic-American
community in our international public diplomacy efforts?
Answer. We are reaching out to the Muslim community in the United States, not
only to gain valuable information from them about the Islamic faith and belief sys-
tem, but also to articulate to them the ways in which we are seeking to commu-
nicate to the Muslim world. By educating, informing, and consulting these groups,
we are actually reaching out overseas, as they communicate to their friends and
neighbors living abroad.
We are very encouraged by the amount of interest Muslims in America have
shown in helping to articulate the common values and shared beliefs Americans
have with other cultures. Recently, we confirmed that there is a newly formed group
called the Council of American Muslims for Understanding, which is seeking as its
mission to educate both Americans and people outside the United States about the
many important achievements of Muslims in America and throughout history. To
achieve these goals, the Council will host and sponsor seminars, speaking engage-
ments, engage in media relationships, produce and distribute its own work, and or-
ganize cultural and educational exchange programs.
These kinds of organizations, which are more flexible and often more credible
than government bodies, will be indispensable in telling our story and forming an
active dialogue. Dialogue demands two-way communication. If such organizations
can provide a framework for non-Americans to speak to Americans, that answers
an important need, which is for us to be seen as listeners, not just talkers.
Question. What is the degree to which U.S. Ambassadors are provided with public
diplomacy training prior to deployment?
Answer. I meet with the Ambassadors-designate individually as well as during
the Ambassadorial Seminar where we have a collective exchange of views regarding
public diplomacy and its central role in American diplomacy. Also included in the
Seminar program are:
1. A 45 minute interactive discussion on the importance of Public Affairs/Pub-
lic Diplomacy with one or more of my senior Public Diplomacy officers.
2. Two days of intensive media skills training with a professional media train-
er.
3. A session with a representative of the State Department Press Office to re-
spond to specific concerns of Ambassadors regarding State Department rules
and practices for dealing with the media (e.g., what they can say prior to Senate
confirmation, prior to presentation of credentials in the host country, and co-
ordination of their activities and messages overseas with Washington).
The Public Diplomacy Training Division of the Foreign Service Institute can, as
a standard practice, coordinate with the respective bureau Public Diplomacy offices
and Public Affairs Offices in the Ambassadors country of assignment to create a
profile of public diplomacy activities being carried out at the post.
In addition, during consultations in Washington, most ambassadors meet with
Public Diplomacy officers in their respective bureaus to gain greater familiarity with
the types of public diplomacy activities being undertaken in their countries of as-
signment.
Question. Has any aspect of the Smith-Mundt or Zorinsky restrictions on dissemi-
nation of public diplomacy materials interfered with your ability to engage effec-
tively in public diplomacy overseas or to garner American support for public diplo-
macy efforts?
64
Answer. These laws have not affected our public diplomacy effort. Since USIAs
consolidation into the State Department, it has been a challenge to respect these
restrictions while facilitating the integration of public diplomacy programs and ex-
pertise into States mainstream foreign policy process. We have been able to accom-
plish this successfully, though admittedly the active use of the internet to carry out
our public diplomacy mission overseas poses particular challenges.
The continued applicability of both section 501 of Smith-Mundt and the Zorinsky
Amendment was discussed during consolidation and affirmed in the Foreign Affairs
Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, as amended. The continued applicability of
these restrictions on domestic dissemination of public diplomacy materials enables
us to continue to focus effectively on one of our core missionsto inform and influ-
ence foreign audiences.
Question. How can we measure success in our public diplomacy efforts, and how
can we sell this success to the American people?
Answer. We do not sell our successes to the American people. Rather, through
periodic congressional hearings, speeches before interested audiences, and media ac-
tivities, we inform the American people and their elected representatives about
what we are doing.
The success of our outreach to the Muslim world and all PD efforts is defined,
as it has been in the past, by the successful completion of individual programs, such
as the educational exchanges, International Visitors programs, speakers and jour-
nalist tours, and television co-ops and broadcast vignettes. All of these efforts offer
international audiences a look inside the U.S., and highlight the long-term contribu-
tions these programs make to establishing a world of democracies.
We show continuous progress toward these goals through specific examples of how
public diplomacy has helped to effect change in the international policy arena and
contributed to successful practices throughout the worldfor example, of heads of
state of countries joining the Coalition Against Terrorism, 50 percent were Inter-
national Visitors through State Department public diplomacy programs; this expo-
sure to the U.S. at a critical stage in the political education of these leaders had
a real impact on how they conduct their relations with the U.S. today.
Another example of how we measure results is through the alumni of the Depart-
ments educational exchange programs, who have been very active in their countries
talking about their experiences in the U.S. and helping to bridge the perception gap
that exists between different cultures. We are going to develop a database to keep
up with individuals who have participated in our educational exchange programs.
As we follow their careers and continue to reach out to these alumni, we will see
the results of their visits time and again over the course of their lives.
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, U.S. SENATOR FROM
WISCONSIN
I am particularly pleased to welcome Under Secretary Beers, who has been lead-
ing an impressive State Department effort to improve our public diplomacy in the
aftermath of the attacks of September 11. I am also pleased that Governor Pattiz
of the Broadcasting Board of Governors will be joining us today to discuss our na-
tions efforts to promote our values and objectives through broadcasts in local lan-
guages in communities across the globe. The perspectives on the second panel today
should also help clarify our efforts to support reliable independent media efforts in
other countries.
At the hearing today, I will also join many of my colleagues in recognizing that
we must take steps, as a priority, to reach out to Muslim and Arab communities
around the world to counter unfortunate misunderstandings about American policy
or American objectives in the campaign against global terrorism. By reaching out
to these Muslim communities, we also have an important opportunity to dem-
onstrate that the Islamic world is not unified in opposition to our country or our
way of life.
As Chair of the Subcommittee on African Affairs, I have been particularly active
in urging the Secretary of State to reach out to Muslim leaders in Africa. And I am
pleased to have had an opportunity to travel this year to several African nations
that have important Muslim communities. Through those travels, I have sought to
initiate a direct dialogue with Muslim leaders. As a nation, we must continue to
make such public diplomacy a priority. And I am particularly pleased to support leg-
65
islation that is now pending in Congress to expand public diplomacy in predomi-
nantly Muslim countries, including in countries across Africa and Asia.
But we must also recognize that effective public diplomacy must always build on
and reinforce our core values as a society. Those values include a commitment to
accurate and reliable information on United States policy and on the vibrant diver-
sity of opinions and beliefs that makes us such a strong and prosperous democracy.
Our public outreach must also reinforce our core commitment to human rights prin-
ciples. In particular, we must ensure that our friends and allies understand that we
will not ignore human rights in the interest of building an immediate anti-terrorism
coalition.
I look forward to considering how we can build on the efforts that are already un-
derway to improve our ability to communicate our nations core beliefs to other
countries and communities. This hearing today offers an important opportunity to
initiate that discussion.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY, U.S. SENATOR FROM

MASSACHUSETTS
Mr. Chairman, I commend you for holding this hearing in the Senate Foreign Re-
lations Committee on the important issue of public diplomacy. I welcome the oppor-
tunity to submit testimony.
One of the clear lessons of September 11th is that our country needs to do more
to ensure that future generations in the Islamic world understand American values
and culture. Nearly 1.5 billion people live in the Islamic world. If we ignore the anti-
American attitudes so prevalent in those countries, we do so at our own peril.
If we address the problem directly, by teaching American values to young people
from the Islamic world, we have a chance, in the long run, of changing negative atti-
tudes. Its a long process, but September 11th has taught us that we must begin
it now.
There are many ways to share Americas values with others, and this important
hearing will highlight many of them. Among the most effective public diplomacy ac-
tions at our disposal are international educational exchange programs. There are no
better ambassadors for American values than Americans themselves. Student ex-
change programs have proven to be effective in reaching out to the next generation
of leaders. As Secretary Powell said in his August 2001 Statement on International
Education Week, I can think of no more valuable asset to our country than the
friendship of future world leaders who have been educated here.
On May 10, Senators Lugar, Leahy, Chafee, Dodd, Hagel, Gordon Smith, Cochran,
Brownback, Jeffords, Durbin, Feingold, and Landrieu joined me in introducing the
Cultural Bridges Act of 2002. Our legislation, S. 2505, seeks to increase funding for
student and other exchanges between Americans and visitors from the Islamic
world. It would also create a new high school exchange program for students from
the Islamic world.
The Cultural Bridges Act would authorize $75 million above current appropria-
tions in fiscal years 2003 through 2007 to expand the activities of the State Depart-
ments existing educational and cultural programs in the Islamic world. It would
also authorize $20 million in fiscal years 2003 through 2007 for the Department to
establish a new high school student exchange program to enable competitively se-
lected students from the Islamic world to study in the United States at a public high
school for an academic year.
The State Department currently manages a number of international student edu-
cational and cultural exchange programs that have helped foster mutual respect and
understanding in many countries worldwide. These programs enable approximately
5,000 Americans to travel abroad and 20,000 foreign visitors to travel to the United
States annually to study, teach, and engage in people-to-people programs. They
have been successful in promoting American values and cultural tolerance.
Unfortunately, visitors and students from the Islamic world are significantly
underrepresented in many of these programs. Individuals in the Islamic world rep-
resent approximately 25 percent of the worlds 6.2 billion people. However, in fiscal
year 2000, less than 10 percent of the participants in State Department cultural and
educational exchange programs were from the Islamic countries covered under our
legislation, and less than 12 percent of the budget was spent on these countries. Ac-
cording to the State Departments Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, fund-
ing for exchanges has fallen by almost a third since 1993 when adjusted for infla-
tion.
The additional $75 million our legislation authorizes for existing programs to be
expanded in the Islamic world is essential to the objective of promoting greater un-
66
derstanding of American values and ideals. Existing programs provide the essential
building blocks for an expanded and sustained effort to reach more broadly into
these societies, to foster mutual respect, and to counter the hatred that can lead to
acts of terrorism.
Last October, President Bush spoke eloquently about the need to reach out in
friendship to the Islamic world. In a speech to students at Thurgood Marshall Ex-
tended Elementary School in Washington DC, the President said that America is
determined to build ties of trust and friendship with people all around the world
particularly with children and people in the Islamic world.
To facilitate the Presidents goal of reaching children, our legislation would also
create a new program for high school students from the Islamic world to study in
the United States. No federal program currently exists to facilitate such student ex-
changes with the ever-increasing number of youths in the Islamic world.
There are many benefits to reaching out to students while they are young and
openminded to enhance cultural understanding and tolerance. Todays high school
students are tomorrows leaders, and we need to begin working with them now to
inform them about our country.
In an January 20, 2002 article in the Washington Post, a former Fulbright schol-
arship recipient from Egypt expressed concern that his university in Egypt was and
continues to be fertile ground for recruiters from terrorist or extremist organiza-
tions. Our challenge is to provide young students with the opportunity to learn
about America, participate in all aspects of American family life, and understand
our values before they reach that stage.
The high school student exchange program authorized in our legislation is mod-
eled on the State Departments highly successful Future Leaders Exchange Program
(FLEX), which brings approximately 1,000 students ages 1517 from the nations of
the former Soviet Union to the United States each year to attend an American high
school for a year and live with an American family.
The FLEX program has been effective in shaping attitudes among the students
selected to participate from those nations. A 1998 U.S. government study, which
compared Russian FLEX alumni with other Russian youth of the same age, found
that the FLEX alumni are more open to and accepting of Western values and demo-
cratic ideals. They are more likely to want to become leaders in and to make a con-
tribution to their society. They tend to be more optimistic than other Russian youths
about the future of their countryespecially its evolution to a more democratic,
rule-of-law society.
Importantly, the FLEX program has been successful in the six predominantly Is-
lamic countries of those nationsAzerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan,
Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. More than 1,500 students from those Muslim coun-
tries have studied and lived in the United States since the program began. FLEX
alumni in Azerbaijan and Turkinenistan are teaching English in their home coun-
tries, and alumni in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have been involved in activities to
develop democratic practices. Given the track record in these countries, there is
every reason to believe that a high school student exchange program would succeed
throughout the Islamic world.
Like the existing FLEX program, our legislation requires participating students
in high school exchanges from the Islamic world to be selected competitively and
in a manner that ensures geographic, gender, and socio-economic diversity. To qual-
ify, students must be tested extensively and interviewed under State Department
guidelines. As with the FLEX program, the State Department will work with experi-
enced American non-governmental organizations to recruit, select, and place stu-
dents, and will remain in close contact with the public high school, the American
host family, and American non-governmental organizations while the students are
in the United States.
All students and visitors participating in programs authorized in the legislation
must be admissible under all our immigration laws and procedures. Legislation re-
cently signed into law will improve our ability to screen foreign students by requir-
ing increased communication among the State Department, the INS, and the schools
enrolling foreign students, and by closing gaps in the existing foreign student moni-
toring program.
Our legislation has been endorsed by the Alliance for International Education and
Cultural Exchange, AMIDEAST, AFS, the Academy for Educational Development,
the American Councils for International Education, the American Institute for For-
eign Study, the Institute of International Education, the National Council for Inter-
national Visitors, Sister Cities International, World Learning, and World Study
Group.
As the Director of the Alliance for International Educational and Cultural Ex-
change, a coalition of 65 organizations with chapters in all 50 states, former Ambas-
67
sador Kenton Keith, wrote: Winning the war on terrorism will demand more than
just our military prowess. It will require us to engage the peoples of the Islamic
world about our society and values if we are to forge the mutual understanding and
respect that will be the basis of peaceful productive relationships. The exchanges
authorized in your bill are the most cost-effective way to encourage the positive per-
sonal and institutional relationships that will enhance our long-term national secu-
rity. I ask the committee to include copies of this letter and other endorsement let-
ters in the hearing record.
America must respond to the terrorist threat on many levels. We need to ensure
that our defenses are strong, our borders are secure, and our relationships with al-
lies are vibrant. We also need to do more in the area of public diplomacy.
It is clearly in Americas national security interest to promote more people-to-peo-
ple contacts throughout the Muslim world. In a May 3rd address to the World Af-
fairs Council in California, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz spoke about
the need to reach out and strengthen voices of moderation in the Islamic world and
to bridge the dangerous gap between the West and the Muslim world. He said
America must begin now . . . the gap is wide and there is no time for delay.
After September 11, many of the Muslim countries condemned those attacks and
pledged to help the United States fight terrorism. As we have seen in Afghanistan,
Pakistan, and elsewhere in the Muslim world, some individuals and factions within
a country support terrorists and terrorist organizations, while others seek to resolve
issues peacefully. America can reduce support for terrorism by reaching out more
effectively in friendship to all nations in the Islamic world.
Building bridges of understanding and tolerance across cultures will help ensure
that Americans and people of the Islamic world will truly understand and know
each another. Clearly, international educational and cultural exchanges can play a
significant role in Americas public diplomacy efforts in the Islamic world.
I understand the Chairman intends to propose legislation to address these and
other important public diplomacy issues in the near future. I welcome this leader-
ship, and I urge the committee to include the Cultural Bridges Act in public diplo-
macy legislation.
[Letters in support of the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002 follow:]
WORLD STUDY GROUP,

SAN FRANCISCO, CA,
April 2, 2002.
Hon. EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Hon. RICHARD LUGAR,
and Hon. LINCOLN CHAFEE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: On behalf, of the World Study
Group, I write to thank you for your leadership in introducing the Cultural Bridges
Act of 2002. The World Study Group and its affiliated J1 visa programs are dedi-
cated to increasing understanding and trust between people through international
cultural exchange.
Building productive ties with the Muslim world will require a sustained and seri-
ous commitment that reaches well beyond our current efforts. The exchanges au-
thorized in your bill are the most cost-effective way to encourage the positive per-
sonal and institutional relationships that will enhance our long-term national secu-
rity goals. Breaking down misunderstanding requires that our peoples know each
other better.
Congressional leadership will be crucial to this endeavor. Student exchanges from
the Muslim world are among the lowest of any region, and significant new resources
will be required to jump-start this effort. Moreover, a clear federal commitment will
leverage private sector support and will immediately engage the American people
directly in the conduct of this high priority foreign policy initiative.
Your legislation is the right bill at the right time. On behalf of AYUSA,
AuPairCare, and Intrax Inc., we thank you. You have the gratitude and support of
our staff and field representatives throughout the United States.
Sincerly,
JOHN WILHELM,
President.
68
WORLD LEARNING,
WASHINGTON, DC,
April 1, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: Thank you for your leadership
in introducing the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002. Enactment of this legislation will
make possible increased opportunities to bring current and future leaders from the
Islamic world to the United States and to send Americans to Muslim countries to
teach and study.
Expanded opportunities for citizen exchange between the United States and the
Islamic world will help to engender increased respect, understanding and trust be-
tween our peoples. Building this mutual understanding will enhance our national
security by broadening the range of productive interactions between the United
States and Muslim countries.
Currently, student and other exchange flows with Muslim countries are lower
than with other regions of the world. The programs which the Cultural Bridges Act
authorizes would provide for significant increases at this crucial time for our nation.
Thank you again for your leadership in working to strengthen these important pro-
grams.
Sincerely yours,
ROBERT CHASE,
Vice President.
SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL,

WASHINGTON, DC,
April 1, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: On behalf of Sister Cities Inter-
national and the 700 U.S. cities joined in cooperative sister city partnerships with
1,500 international cities in 121 countries, I applaud your leadership in introducing
the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002. The Cultural Bridges Act of 2002 will be a vital
tool in the conduct of U.S. foreign policy and public diplomacy in response to new
challenges facing the United States.
The need for increased international understanding and cooperation has never
been more imperative than in the aftermath of September 11. International edu-
cation and exchange programs are critical elements in advancing U.S. foreign policy
and national security, as they build understanding and cooperation between Ameri-
cans and future foreign leaders. Nearly 150 present and past foreign heads of state
made their first visits to the United States on exchange programs. This powerful
tool for building productive, positive relationships has served the United States ex-
traordinarily well over the years, and has included visits from world leaders such
as Anwar Sadat and Indira Gandhi, French Premier Lionel Jospin and British
Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Perhaps most importantly, the Cultural Bridges Act boldly leads the way for the
federal government to encourage sustainable, cooperative relationships between the
United States and the Islamic world. In the fight against terrorism and efforts to
improve our national security, there can be no doubt that fostering international ex-
changes will help diminish negative stereotypes and build an environment of mutual
understanding and respect for differences. Furthermore, the Cultural Bridges Act
will help foster citizen diplomacy initiatives that will promote the involvement of
local citizens in international engagement. Now more than ever, the federal govern-
ment must invest in capacity building at the community level to promote citizen di-
plomacy, particularly with regard to the Islamic world. As we know, resources allot-
ted for these activities are drastically insufficient in the current climate, and we
hope the introduction of the Cultural Bridges Act will move our nation in the right
direction of enhanced cooperation.
Thank you again for your leadership on this pressing issue.
69
Sincerely,
TIM HONEY,
Executive Director,
Sister Cities International.
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS,

WASHINGTON, DC,
April 1, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: On behalf of the Board and mem-
bers of the National Council for International Visitors (NCIV), we thank you for
your initiative in introducing the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002. NCIV members
nonprofit program agencies and 95 community organizations across the United
Statesorganize professional programs, home visits, and cultural activities for par-
ticipants in the State Departments International Visitor Program and other ex-
changes. More than 80,000 volunteers are involved in NCIV member activities each
year, including WorldBoston, International Center of Indianapolis, and the World
Affairs Council of Rhode Island.
NCIV members promote citizen diplomacythe idea that the individual citizen
has the right, even the responsibility, to help shape U.S. foreign relations one
handshake at a time through exchanges. We are grateful for your leadership in in-
troducing this legislation that will make more of these handshakes possible with
participants from underserved areas of the world.
Sincerely,
ALAN KUMAMOTO,
Chair, Board of Directors.
SHERRY L. MULLER, PH.D.,
President.
INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION,

NEW YORK, NY,
April 2, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: On behalf of the Institute of
International Education, including our Trustees and volunteers across the country,
please accept IIEs thanks and appreciation for the leadership you are showing by
introducing the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002. Your initiative could not be more rel-
evant and timely.
As always, the leadership of Congress in international educational exchange is
critical. Now, in vulnerable areas of the world where peace, understanding and
progress through education are vitally needed to insure that terrorism and intoler-
ance are eliminated, your legislation addresses key areas where we can work to
build shared values.
Exchanges of high school and college students, graduate students and young pro-
fessionals, as well as others, who can help create the climate we need where pro-
gressive democratic developments flourish are sorely needed in Africa, the Near
East, Central and South Asia, and Southeast Asia. The focus of your Cultural
Bridges Act of 2002 on members of the Organization of Islamic Conference includes
virtually every nation we need to reach if we are serious about making people to
people diplomacy work for youth. As you know, the Institute has always regarded
the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchanges Act of 1961 as one of the most im-
portant of all this nations foreign policy documents. By directing the Department
of State to establish new initiatives through the authority of the 1961 Act you will
assure that the philanthropic and higher education sectors not only support your
efforts but help you leverage government resources for important common purposes.
70
Please let me know if there is anything the Institute can do to assist you in this
critically important endeavor at a time of great national need.
Sincerely,
,
Institute of International Education.
AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR FOREIGN STUDY,

STAMFORD, CT,
April 2, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: As a member of the Alliance for
International Educational and Cultural Exchange, I write to thank you for your
leadership in introducing the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002.
Winning the war on terrorism will demand more than just our military prowess.
It will require us to engage the peoples of the Islamic world about our society and
values if we are to forge the mutual understanding and respect that will be the
basis of peaceful, productive relationships. As September 11 and its aftermath make
clear, our public diplomacy has fallen short.
Building productive ties will require a sustained and serious commitment that
reaches well beyond our current efforts. The exchanges authorized in your bill are
the most cost-effective way to encourage the positive personal and institutional rela-
tionships that will enhance our long-term national security.
Congressional leadership will be crucial to this endeavor. Student and exchange
flows from the Muslim world are among the lowest of any region, and significant
new resources will be required to jump-start this effort. Moreover, a clear federal
commitment will leverage private sector support from universities, schools, busi-
nesses, and communities across the U.S. This initiative will engage the American
people directly in the conduct of the highest priority foreign policy.
Your legislation is the right bill at the right time. You have the gratitude and
support of members of the exchange community throughout the United States.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. BRENNAN,
President.
ACADEMY FOR EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT,

WASHINGTON, DC,
April 2, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: On behalf of the Academy for
Educational Development, a non-profit organization serving people in more than 160
countries, I want to thank you for your leadership in introducing the Cultural
Bridges Act of 2002.
International exchange programs are a critical component of the war on terrorism.
Exchange programs enhance mutual understanding and build long-term bridges
with individuals in other countries. Expanding the flow of people, ideas and infor-
mation will promote greater understanding of the United States and will advance
our foreign policy objectives.
The International Visitor Program has been particularly effective at reaching fu-
ture foreign leaders and at advancing key foreign policy objectives. For example, a
recent leadership development program brought student leaders from the Middle
East and North Africa for exchanges with student leaders across the United States.
Another program on the role of religion in the United States brought administrators
from religious educational institutions, or madrassahs, in Pakistan to meet with
civic and religious leaders in several cities. Programs such as these that target key
issues and leaders should be significantly expanded in the Islamic world.
71
Although the worlds attention has been focused on the Muslim world, exchange
programs from countries with large Islamic populations are underrepresented in
U.S. government-sponsored exchange programs. Your bill will significantly enhance
the capacity to reach out to individuals in these countries through people-to-people
exchanges that are among our best tools of diplomacy.
We thank you for your leadership, vision and commitment in introducing this crit-
ical piece of legislation.
Sincerely,
STEPHEN F. MOSELEY,
President and Chief Executive Officer.
AFSUSA, INC.,
NEW YORK, NY,
April 1, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: I am writing on behalf of our
staff, volunteers, and board members located in all 50 states to express our pleasure
and thanks for initiating the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002.
AFS is the oldest, largest, and most diverse high school exchange program in the
United States and in the world. We understand and appreciate the leadership you
have demonstrated in sponsoring this bill. Public diplomacy in the Islamic world re-
quires the focus and funding contained in your bill. Our 54 years of experience in
the field of exchange tells us that a serious commitment, sustained over a number
of years, will be needed to defeat terrorism at its roots by increasing understanding
and tolerance among people of different countries, beliefs and values. AFS ex-
changed students from Germany and Japan with the U.S. almost immediately after
World War II. Today those countries are our allies. Democratic principles, respect
for others, and individual freedom are our values, and they can be powerful when
seen through daily interaction with our families and students.
You are doing the right thing. We stand ready to support you in any way we can.
Thank you for your pursuit of peace and freedom.
Sincerely,
ALEX J. PLINIO,
President.
ALLIANCE FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE,

NEW YORK, NY,
April 2, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: On behalf of the 65 member
NGOs of the Alliance for International Educational and Cultural Exchange, I write
to thank you for your leadership in introducing the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002.
Winning the war on terrorism will demand more than just our military prowess.
It will require us to engage the peoples of the Islamic world about our society and
values if we are to forge the mutual understanding and respect that will be the
basis of peaceful, productive relationships. As September 11 and its aftermath make
clear, our public diplomacy has fallen short.
Building productive ties will require a sustained and serious commitment that
reaches well beyond our current efforts. The exchanges authorized in your bill are
the most cost-effective way to encourage the positive personal and institutional rela-
tionships that will enhance our long-term national security.
Congressional leadership will be crucial to this endeavor. Student and exchange
flows from the Muslim world are among the lowest of any region, and significant
new resources will be required to jump-start this effort. Moreover, a clear federal
commitment will leverage private sector support from universities, schools, busi-
72
nesses, and communities across the U.S. This initiative will engage the American
people directly in the conduct of the highest priority foreign policy.
Your legislation is the right bill at the right time. You have the gratitude and
support of members of the exchange community throughout the United States.
Sincerely,
KENTON W. KEITH,
U.S. Ambassador (retired),
Chair, Board of Directors.
AMERICAN COUNCILS FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION,

WASHINGTON, DC,
April 2, 2002.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
DEAR SENATORS KENNEDY, LUGAR, AND CHAFEE: I write to commend you for your
leadership in introducing the Cultural Bridges Act of 2002, a legislative initiative
designed to engage the diverse Islamic populations around the world through inter-
national exchange programs. I particular want to thank you for focusing on high
school exchanges as a highly effective mechanism for introducing the United States
to this audience, and them to our fellow Americans.
While our countrys public diplomacy effortswhich include exchange programs
have earned us many friends in parts of the world, the dramatic events of Sep-
tember 11th and our examination of our standing with key populations in the Is-
lamic world since those terrorist attacks have revealed that we have neglected a
critical world population stretching from West Africa to Southeast Asia. This arc
crosses the Arab Middle East, through Southeastern Europe and Central Asia to
Indochina approximately 1.4 billion people populate the countries along this arc.
Your initiative would make it our national policy to reach out to the peoples of these
countries to build mutual understanding.
The Cultural Bridges Act of 2002 would capitalize on our nations capacity to edu-
cate and inform by bringing individuals to the United States to learn about our cul-
ture, language, and aspirationsall while studying in school, mastering their cho-
sen profession, or doing research. It provides a highly effective (and low cost) way
to positively influence foreign populations through citizen diplomacy, something
weve done well with post-war Europe and Japan, Latin America, and most recently
with the countries of the former Warsaw Pact.
My own organization has utilized academic and youth exchanges for more than
25 years with the former Soviet Union. Among our many successes in fostering un-
derstanding of the United States in that region, some of the most impressive results
result from exchange programs involving youth, like the Future Leaders Exchange
Program, and secondary school teachers, like the Excellence in Teaching Awards Ex-
change Programboth funded through an earlier congressional initiative, the
FREEDOM Support Act. The Cultural Bridges Act that you are introducing in the
Senate would facilitate similar successes in the Islamic World.
The American Councils has experience with working in the Muslim communities
of the NIScommunities that exist throughout the 12 countries of the old Soviet
Union. Some of the most dynamic needs for expanded exchange opportunities in the
NIS are apparent in the predominately Islamic countries of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistancountries that are critical
to addressing our urgent security concerns in Central Asia and all of which would
be eligible to benefit from your legislation.
Your exchanges initiative is both an effective bulwark against ignorance of the
United States and a proactive measure for securing the peace we hope to achieve
through our current military campaign. I applaud your leadership in introducing
this bill, and look forward to its enactment.
Sincerely,
DAN E. DAVIDSON, PH.D.,
President.
73
PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMB. KENTON W. KEITH, CHAIR, ALLIANCE FOR INTER-
NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE AND SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,
MERIDIAN INTERNATIONAL CENTER
Good morning. Im Kenton Keith, senior vice president of the Meridian Inter-
national Center and chair of the board of directors of the Alliance for International
Educational and Cultural Exchange. The Alliance is an association of 65 U.S.-based
exchange organizations, and as you know, Mr. Chairman, we have worked closely
with this committee over the years on a variety of issues. MIC is a nonprofit organi-
zation that promotes international understanding through exchanges of people,
ideas, and the arts.
Prior to taking up my current positions, I was a Foreign Service Officer with the
United States Information Agency. Much of my career was spent in the Middle East,
including my appointment by President Bush in 1992 to be U.S. Ambassador to
Qatar. Following that assignment, I headed USIAs area office that supervised all
the agencys operations in the Near East and South Asia. More recently, I took on
a temporary assignment for the State Department during which I established and
directed the Coalition Information Center in Islamabad.
Mr. Chairman, both in my present capacities and based on my past experiences,
I welcome the opportunity to provide this statement for the record about the impor-
tance of public diplomacy, especially in the wake of the horrific events of September
11 and in support of our national campaign to rid the world of terrorism.
To win the war on terrorism, the United States will need more than the might
and skill of our armed forces, To ultimately defeat terrorism, we must also engage
the Muslim world in the realm of ideas, values, and beliefs. No previous foreign af-
fairs crisis has been so deeply rooted in cultural misunderstanding, and we must
address this gulf of misunderstanding if we are to succeed.
Policy disagreements alone cannot account for the fact that many in Islamic coun-
tries regard the United States, the greatest force for good in human history, as a
source of evil. As a nation, we have not done an adequate job of explaining ourselves
to the world, or of building the personal and institutional connections with these
countries that support healthy bilateral relationships.
As a long-term solution to the profound problems of cultural misunderstanding,
there will be no substitute for public diplomacy. It must be a key component of our
long-term effort to eradicate terrorism. We applaud your leadership, Mr. Chairman,
and that of your committee in focusing attention on what must be a critical element
in our successful anti-terrorism strategy.
People-to-people ties are an essential part of our public diplomacy. As Ambassador
Arthur Burns once said, The achievement . . . of true understanding between any
two governments depends fundamentally on the kind of relationship that exists be-
tween the peoples, rather than on the foreign ministers and ambassadors.
In the Islamic world, we dearly have not done an adequate job of fostering rela-
tionships between our peoples. A February Gallup poll reports that 61 percent of
Muslims believe that the attack on the United States was a riot carried out by
Arabs. Mr. Chairman, that statistic alone speaks somber volumes about our failure
to project our values and ideals effectively in Islamic nations.
We must recognize that we begin this effort in a very unfavorable position.
Changing mindsor merely opening themis a long, painstaking process. There
are no quick fixes. And if we are truly to win the war on terrorism, there will be
no avoiding the need to build bridges between the American people and the people
of the Muslim world. Mr. Chairman, we must begin this process now.
This effort will require us to be creative, disciplined, and patient as we try to
reach audiences whose attitudes towards us range from profoundly skeptical to
openly hostile. We will not succeed in opening every mind, but we do not need to
do so. What we must succeed in doing is challenging and changing a climate of opin-
ion that unjustly paints the United States as a source of evil. Improving the rela-
tionships that exist between our peoples is the best way to do that. And if we suc-
ceed, terrorists will find it much more difficult to gain support or sympathy, either
from governments or from general publics.
Increasing the State Departments exchanges with the Islamic world will give us
the means to build a range of productive, positive relationships based on shared in-
terests. Such an initiative will engage the American publicin our communities,
schools, and universitiesin this effort to project American values. We will find no
better or more convincing representatives of our way of life.
And the engagement of the American public will leverage significant additional
resources to support this effort.
74
Under such an initiative, the United States could undertake a broad range of ex-
change activities that would enhance U.S. national security. These programs could
include:
Greater numbers of Fulbright students and scholars working together on issues
such as public health, cultural studies, conflict resolution, and economic devel-
opment;
More American universities with linkages to institutions in the Muslim world
in fields like journalism, American studies, and business;
Increased numbers of emerging leaders from Islamic countries meeting their
American professional counterparts and visiting American homes and commu-
nities as part of the International Visitor program and other citizen exchange
programs;
More young people from the Islamic world encountering the U.S., its people,
and its culture through long and short-term exchange programs, school-to-school
projects. or by learning English from an American teacher;
Exchanges of teachers between the U.S. and Muslim countries exposing stu-
dents on both sides to differing perspectives and more balanced, objective cur-
ricula.
This will require a major effort, requiring us to engage a very broad range of
countries, in an area reaching from Africa to the Middle East, stretching further
eastward from Central Asia to the Indian subcontinent to Southeast Asia. Address-
ing so many countries and cultures will demand thoughtfully differentiated ap-
proaches to public diplomacy. In some countries, significant increases in our tradi-
tional exchanges, such as the Fulbright and International Visitor programs, will be
appropriate, welcome, and effective. In other countries, such an approach may be
seen as threatening. Particularly in those cases, we must be creative in finding ways
of reaching more skeptical publics, such as journalists and religious communities.
This initiative will also require significant new resources. The scope of the task
is too great, and its importance to our national security too critical, to be able to
accomplish our goals by simply shifting money from other regions of the world. The
importance of maintaining a broad, worldwide coalition to combat terrorism sug-
gests strongly that shortchanging one area of the world in order to temporarily em-
phasize another will be an ineffective strategy. To do this job right will require new
funding.
Reductions in public diplomacy over time have limited out reach: we have closed
posts and cultural centers, reduced numbers of public diplomacy positions in our
embassies, and steeply reduced the number of exchange participants. As populations
in significant Muslim countries have increased by approximately 15 percent over the
past 10 years, the numbers of exchange participants from key countries such as
Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Turkey have declined by approximately 25 percent.
In the face of those reductions, Mr. Chairman, it is important for us to recognize
the dedication, hard work, and effectiveness of the State Departments corps of pub-
lic diplomacy officers. Faced with diminishing resources and a major reorganization
that abolished USIA and moved their function and careers into State, these profes-
sionals have performed in their typical fashion: professionally and effectively.
Mr. Chairman, a meaningful and effective Islamic exchange initiative will require
$95 million above the current appropriation for State exchanges. We recognize that
this is a significant amount of money. We believe, however, that this funding level
is necessary and appropriate, given the expanse of the Muslim world and the ur-
gency and importance of the task at hand. Moreover, this amount of money to be
spent on promoting our ideas and values is very small when compared to the sums
we will expend on military hardware, but is no less crucial to our success.
Mr. Chairman, we welcome the opportunity to discuss this proposal with you and
your staff, and we have found broad bipartisan support for an Islamic exchange ini-
tiative in both chambers. As you know, Senators Kennedy and Lugar have recently
introduced the Cultural Bridges Act, calling for an additional $95 million annually
for exchanges with the Muslim world. Their bill has already attracted twelve addi-
tional cosponsors, drawn from both sides of the aisle. In the House, International
Relations Committee Chairman Hydes Freedom Promotion Act also authorizes
new funds for exchanges with the Muslim world. The Hyde bill has been marked
up by the Committee and has been reported to the House for its consideration. This
level of support from senior members of both parties and both chambers underscores
the timeliness and importance of this initiative. This is a moment when our national
interests require Congressional leadership to build these cultural bridges. The U.S.
exchange community stands ready to assist you in this effort, and is grateful for
your support.
75
In addition to his Alliance testimony, Kenton Keith submits to the Com-
mittee an additional statement based more directly on his Foreign Service
experience. The text of that addendum follows:
Mr. Chairman, it is indeed timely for the committee to examine our public diplo-
macy assets in the wake of the attacks on our nation. I would like to draw your
attention to problems that handicap the dedicated individuals who carry out public
diplomacy in Washington and in the field. Structural problems stemming from the
amalgamation of USIA into the Department of State have had the unintentional ef-
fect of diminishing the thrust of our public diplomacy efforts.
I also would like to comment briefly on the new regional broadcasting initiative
launched by the Voice of America.
Structural Faults: An Opportunity Deferred
I served as the USIA representative on the Planning Committee. In the months
of our deliberations it was clear to me that the disappearance of the USIA Area Of-
fices would be the biggest challenge to the effective linkage of Washington to the
field operations. The Area Offices, which corresponded to the State Department re-
gional bureaus, had tremendous clout. They were headed by the Agencys senior-
most career officers, they controlled field budgets, they had direct and regular access
to the Agencys Directors and the political appointees who headed the Information
and Educational and Cultural Exchange bureaus, and they shared with Ambas-
sadors abroad the performance evaluations of our PAOs, the public diplomacy direc-
tors in the field. In other words, PAOs were accountable to both their ambassadors
and their area directors.
In almost every case, Area Directors sat in on the meetings of State Department
regional Assistant Secretaries. Indeed, it was most often the case that they had long
professional relations with those Assistant Secretaries from shared field assign-
ments, and there was a mutual respect and trust built over time. Thus, it was nat-
ural that they were aware of the short- and medium-range policy concerns of any
given period. They were also the custodians of the long-range public diplomacy effort
to create better understanding by foreign audiences of American culture, institu-
tions and values.
In discussions of the foreign affairs reorganization, the interagency planning team
was unable to reach a consensus on how to replace these vital functions, and the
final report went forward with bracketed language, indicating this disagreement.
In the event, the amalgamated Area Offices were reduced in size and power. Area
Directors were replaced by office directors within the State regional bureaus. Also,
some public diplomacy officers, usually even more junior, were assigned to func-
tional bureaus. Moreover, budget control for field operations was moved to the Exec-
utive Officers in the regional bureaus in Washington, and to State administrative
officers in the field.
What Was Lost?
Coordination. USIA Area Directors had the power to intercede with the Bureau
of Educational and Cultural Affairs and the Information Bureau (and to some
extent with the VOA and television producers) to shape products for field use
and to ensure that they were integrated into a well-managed public diplomacy
operation in the field posts. This made it possible to mount a region-wide public
diplomacy effort to meet emerging needs.
Accountability. PAOs were accountable to their ambassadors, of course, as they
are today, but they were also accountable to the Area Directors. With this ar-
rangement, PAOs not only responded to the brush fire public diplomacy issues
at the mission, but also to the longer range challenge of building understanding
and trust through exchange programs, libraries, English language teaching and
cultural exchanges.
Flexibility. Once PAOs lost their status as representatives of an independent
agency, they lost their independent administrative infrastructure. The idea was
to eliminate redundancy and save money. The result has been that PAOs have
become mired in the bureaucratic complexities of the Departments operations,
and have had to spend time with added forms and reports when they should
be out engaging with audiences. Over the years, USIA had developed proce-
dures, including grant management and flexibility in raising money from the
private sector for joint programs, that took account of the fact that it was a pro-
gramming agency. This was new to State, and the loss of these tools has ham-
pered public diplomacy operations.
Under the current structure, which I believe to be fundamentally flawed, the pri-
mary purveyors of public diplomacy resourcesthe Under Secretary for Public Di-
76
plomacy and Public Affairs, the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, and the
Office of International Information Programshave no formal bureaucratic connec-
tion with the public diplomacy sections in our embassies. The Departments senior
official responsible for the conduct of our public diplomacy (the Under Secretary) has
no authority over the field operations that perform that mission.
This anomalous structure runs the risk of marginalizing public diplomacy within
State, and already has diminished its effectiveness. Those senior officials with re-
sponsibility for public diplomacy do not control field resources; those with a direct
connection to the field resources are mid-ranking office directors, and do not have
the clout to take bold action. The structural flaw already is manifesting itself in a
diminished focus, uncoordinated activities, and reduced field resources.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the prescription for change would include the following
elements:
Each regional bureau should have a Deputy Assistant Secretary (DAS) charged
with overseeing its public diplomacy activities. Only by providing senior leadership
will public diplomacy succeed at State.
Establishing a DAS in each regional bureau would ensure that public diplomacy
is actively represented in senior-level meetings and thus an integral component in
our approach to every foreign policy issue. A senior officer with these responsibilities
could effectively coordinate public diplomacy activities across the region, make the
case for additional resources when needed, and play an active role in relevant per-
sonnel matters. The DASs would coordinate closely with the Under Secretary for
Public Diplomacy, who would have input into their annual personnel evaluations.
Creating and maintaining DAS positions would be a critical first step in changing
the Departments culture, and would send an unmistakable message to those who
work at State: that public diplomacy matters, and matters enough to require senior
leadership.
Second, a formal link should exist between the regional DAS for Public Diplo-
macy, the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, the Assistant
Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, and the Coordinator for Inter-
national Information Programs. In USIA the close coordination with the Director,
the Counselor and the Area Directors facilitated broad public diplomacy responses
to any given challenge. At present, the only persons within the Department who
have the authority to launch public diplomacy initiatives across regional bureaus
are the Secretary of State and his Deputy.
A New Voice of America
Mr. Chairman, the Voice of America has launched the Middle East Radio Net-
work, which provides FM broadcasting to Arab audiences with substantial program-
ming of local news and features voiced by speakers of the principal regional dialects,
with a centrally produced world news program in modern standard Arabic. In my
judgment as someone who has served in the region for substantial portions of my
career, this is an ambitious experiment that deserves the full support of Congress.
For too long we have clung to short wave broadcasting with a diminishing audi-
ence, or we have used FM signals that were too weak to be heard. But just as im-
portant as having the right signal is the need for content that speaks to the audi-
ences we seek to reach. This requires the kind of research and production effort that
costs money, but will pay great dividends. Middle East Radio Network is a very
promising concept, and one that has the potential to play a critical role in our long-
term public diplomacy strategy.

Senate Hearing, 107TH Congress - America's Global Dialog: Sharing American Values and The Way Ahead For Public Diplomacy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Senate Hearing, 107TH Congress - America's Global Dialog: Sharing American Values and The Way Ahead For Public Diplomacy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Senate Hearing, 107TH Congress - America's Global Dialog: Sharing American Values and The Way Ahead For Public Diplomacy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S. HRG.

AMERICAS GLOBAL DIALOG: SHARING AMERICAN

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

JUNE 11, 2002

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Staff Director

TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 2002

with innovative programming. Early indications are that it is going

Senator BOXER. Mr. Chairman, could I ask if it would be possible

improve its public diplomacy efforts. We must explain and broad-

the huge multinational companies and also the foreign students

You know, we already have a number of proofs against the fre-

The couple decided to go against this counsel. They did marry.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary.

termining on an annual basis how effectively our resources are

you an example of what it sounds like within the parameters of the

casting in five targeted programming streams directed at specific

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I am delighted that the

casting capacity without a great deal more research on how best to

Television is a medium of programs. Radio says a lot about who

hard-hitting traditional news type programming, and following up

Now, the National Endowment for Democracy supports inde-

Senator LUGAR. Let me ask quickly, do we have enough people

of the studies in Jakarta. In each case we learned how much em-

think it is going to be very difficult in a lot of ways. The money

But Al Jazeera is not the most-listened-to satellite TV service or

rich, Mr. David Hoffman, president of Internews from Arcata, Cali-

STATEMENT OF HON. NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER SPEAKER,

One of my strongest messages in the Pentagon has been, forget

freedom, modernity, and individual rights. Young people growing

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Speaker, our usual practice is to go down

The CHAIRMAN. I guarantee you, within the next couple of days

formulation of foreign policy, that the two have to go hand-in-hand.

affairs, public relations, communications, and media and adver-

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hoffman.

We live in a different world. We live in a world of proliferation

that should be listed by our State Department, by the Secretary,

Kosovars are basically identified as Albanians in their majority,

The third is to create a debate between, in this case, in the Mid-

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Veton. Speaking for myself, I think

Mr. HOFFMAN. What I mean is, there are media assistance

RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

STATEMENT OF SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY, U.S. SENATOR FROM

WORLD STUDY GROUP,

SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL,

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS,

INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION,

AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR FOREIGN STUDY,

ACADEMY FOR EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT,

ALLIANCE FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE,

AMERICAN COUNCILS FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION,

You might also like